Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Canonical Correlation Investigation of the Effect of Job
Stress on Job Satisfaction and Job Performance: A Study of
Private University Teachers from Developing Country
Shama Razi1 and Mehvish Umer2
The aim of this study was to look at the role of job stress on job satisfaction and job
performance among private university teachers. This has been found through
research that remuneration (68%) is the primary source of stress, and then comes the
management related issues such as students’ bad behavior (57%); non-serious
attitude (43.5%) and some family related stressors (61%) are also causing low job
satisfaction and low performance. Family related stressors and stress related to work
load were positively correlated. This research concluded that the family related
stressors and the stress related to pay/ salary are the great sources of low job
satisfaction. The following research has been conducted in order to see the
relationship of job stress and job satisfaction and performance with a relatively new
statistical technique i.e. canonical correlation. Results concluded that when there is
low level of stress then people are highly satisfied with their jobs and perform well.
1. Introduction
Nowadays due to immense competition in academics teachers are not there to teach
students from syllabi. In fact teachers’ role is becoming tougher and tougher day by day.
Teachers’ are there to teach students as well groom them, inform them about ethical
and unethical things related to professional life after graduation. So the question arises
here is related to job stress, his/her responsibility is not just to guide students but also to
keep themselves aware and up to date. This demand of keeping up to date and
performing better in the field requires a lot of hard word, dedication and constant study.
This is natural phenomenon (stress) could be of different types such as work load, job
insecurity, stress from administration and from students’ behavior, etc., which really
impact teachers’ job satisfaction and their performance in the term of teaching and
research.
Investigating the prevalence of stress and the level of job satisfaction among teachers
(Ferris, Bergin, & Wayne, 1988) found out teachers’ 3/4th time and energy have been
spent on attaining goals set by the quality assurance, adapting changing curricula,
handling students’ queries. Teacher’s performance do not just depends on teaching
methodology, taking classes in time, interacting with students, solving their problems
but it also depends on conducting research work and getting publication. Balancing
between these two duties (i.e. teaching and research work) sometimes causes stress to
teachers which lead to low job satisfaction. (Ivancevich & Matteson, 1980). By giving
extra work load such as assigning 10-12 classes per week leads to low quality of
teaching performance which lead to high stress. Higher level of stress and lower job
satisfaction has been seen in young teachers. This could be explained by less
1
Shama Razi, Department of Business Administration, Lahore School of Economics, Pakistan.
Email: shama@lahoreschool.edu.pk
2
Mehvish Umer, Department of Statistics, Mathematics, & Computers, Lahore School of Economics,
Pakistan. Mmahwishu121@gmail.com
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
autonomy, less experience, low salary, no relations with peers and head of department
and greater job insecurity in junior positions (Moyosola Jude Akomolafe, 2014)
2. Literature Review
2.1 Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction has been defined as human’s behavior or attitude towards one’s job.
Most commonly “job satisfaction or dissatisfaction” is a characteristic of occupational
task which is linked to well-being of employees. (Moè*, Pazzaglia, & Ronconi, 2010). It
is defined as how positively or negatively an individual evaluates one’s routine task
(Weiss, 2002). Moreover, teachers’ job contentment is more vital because its deficiency
not only is related with burnout as proposed by (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2009) , however
it’s due to emotional contagion demotivated teachers further demotivate their students
(Hatfiled, Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1993). (Ryan & Deci, 2000) Further highlighted that it’s
due to teachers incapability in satisfying students' requirements for autonomy,
competence and relatedness .On the contrary, teacher's high satisfaction leads to
higher motivation. Hence, increased motivation of teachers achieved from the job has
an effect on their satisfaction level, which is professed as a significant variable affecting
job performance and other organizational outputs. “For example, teacher job
satisfaction was found to be related with teacher quality and retention, organizational
commitment and organizational performance in context of academic achievement,
student behavior, student satisfaction, teacher turnover, and administrative
performance” (Mathieu, 1991); (Ostroff, 1992).
Satisfaction will be high if the worker is happy with job environment, colleagues, and
monetary rewards. Hence, job satisfaction is very subjective at the same time.
Moreover, (Armstrong, 2003) proposed satisfaction is a categorization into extrinsic
factors, intrinsic factors, work place relationships, individual ’capabilities to complete
their routine task, and the quality of supervision. Perhaps, mostly employees relate job
satisfaction with monetary rewards, and it is the first priority of employees working in
any sector of industry. (Al-Ababneh, 2007), explained in the paper that job satisfaction is
highly influenced by demographic characteristics of employees and there is a significant
difference because of demographic profile.
2.2 Job Stress
Stress can be mental or physical. In the teaching profession both type of stresses i.e.
physical and mental are involved. Stress related to office work or simply due to work
pressure can be regarded as job stress. Stress causes employees to display negative
behaviors and attitudes not only in the workplace but it also adversely affect the health
and wellbeing of employees. Most commonly, hectic work environment causes “fatigue,
exhaustion (mental and physical), coronary heart disease, depression, hypertension”
which, is of psychological and physiological in nature (Usman, Ahmed, & Ahmed,
2011).One of the most extensively researched areas in organizations internationally is
work stress. It constantly engrossed researcher’s attention because it has been proved
to play a vital role in certain job related attitudes i.e. “job satisfaction, job performance
and organizational commitment and employee turnover” (Sager, 1994) .
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Universities are the basic foundation, accountable for organizing human capital for all
sphere of life to cater the needs of public, private and social sector. In teaching learning
process at university teachers, are considered the key players. Without teachers
satisfaction the objectives of learning process cannot be achieved. Teacher’s workplace
is highly stressful in a country like Pakistan where, at institution level physical resources
are poor, inappropriate salaries, recurrent discipline problems, majority of teachers are
not well train and operational with modern methodology of teaching and research.
Expectations from teachers are very high at university level as they have to face
challenging and dynamic tasks of teaching and research at same time. Teachers in
private universities expose to heavy stress as compare to those in public universities,
when it comes to outcome or performance. (Chaudhry, 2012)
(Mojoyinola, 2008), in this paper author explained the stress behavior of hospital
nurses, that how do they take stress and what are the effects of these stresses on their
work. Study indicated that nurses who are highly stressed up showed personal and
work behavioral problems such as bullying, absenteeism, etc. (55% or 85). Also study
highlighted that highly stressed up nurses has more problems in work and behavior
aspect in comparison to less stressed up nurses. (t = 2.178, df = 152, P > .05).
2.3 Job Performance
Teacher’s job performance unquestionably has an impact on quality of educational
process and its product. The entire educational structure is shaky if the performance of
teacher is ineffective and poor. The classification of what represents best performance
of teacher is obviously much more complex than just listing of goals. The word teaching
performance refers to the manner of instruction which comprises of how questions are
posed, explanations are given, approval is shown to students and other acts that a
teacher performs in a class-room (Rao, 2001). Teachers’ job performance is influenced
by many factors such as aptitude, attitude, teaching methodology, subject mastery,
personal characteristics, classroom environment, mental ability, relations with students
and staff, teaching techniques, motivational skills and research aptitude. “ (Ferris,
Bergin, & Wayne, 1988) accredited teachers' job performance on seven factors of
performance: preparation and planning, effectiveness in presenting subject matter,
poise, relations with students, self-improvement, relations with other staff and relations
with parents & community”.
Much of research attention is focused on the prevalence of stress that accompanies
efforts to improve job performance. Work stress experience can modify the way the
person feels, behaves, thinks and can also produce changes in their psychological,
physiological behavioral functions. It has been conjectured for several years that stress
serves to stimulate individual to increase his attention to the job thus improving
performance. But this trend is altering as performance falls beyond the optimal level of
stress (Ivancevich & Matteson, 1980). Literature indicates and repeatedly found that
performance decreases with increasing level of stress whether measured by supervisor
rating, organizational perceptions of effectiveness, or job performance on job related
examinations (Jamal, 1984) (Motowidlo, Packard, & Manning, 1986)
Therefore the following main hypotheses were constructed:
 H1: there is a significant association between job satisfaction, job stress, and job
performance.
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3


H2: There is a significant association between job performance and job stress.
H3: There is a significant association between job satisfaction and job stress.
3. The Methodology and Model
The theoretical framework has been developed, shown in figure 1. In this research
study, association between job stress, job satisfaction and job performance (teaching)
were hypothesized and investigated. Different stressors have varied levels of
correlations with job satisfaction and job performance, whereas the difference within the
teachers’ personality may affect the association between these variables.
Job Satisfaction
Job Stress
1. Management Related stress
2. Remuneration and training
related stress
3. Family related stress
4. Work load stress
Performance
1. Teaching performance related to
teaching methodology
2. Teaching performance related to
time management
Figure 1 Theoretical Framework
3.1 Sample and Measurements:
In its broadest conceptualization, this study is intended to address the university
teachers in Lahore, Pakistan. However, the vast diversity of this population in terms of
socioeconomic status and other related variables would make for an immense
undertaking. Therefore, it is necessary to define the setting clearly from which a sample
will be drawn.
The setting for the proposed research study, thus, involves all teachers working within
private business universities of Lahore. Choosing this setting would provide a more
clear idea of how teachers in this group behave and react to different elements of job
stress and what is the teaching performance and job satisfaction may change due the
less and more stress.
The initial random sample size was of 450 teachers of private universities in Lahore.
However, subsequently after removing incomplete questionnaires it was reduced to
301, which equals a response rate of 66.8%.
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
With the help of the past studies and researches, we used a 5-point Likert scale to
measure the job stress, job satisfaction and teachers job performance (in which “1”
showed “no stress” and “5” as “highly stressful” regarding job stress, and “1” for
“strongly disagree” and “5” for “strongly agree” regarding job satisfaction and teachers’
performance). In the beginning of the questionnaire, we have asked about respondent’s
demographic information.
For job stress, 36 statements were constructed which were reduced into four factors,
namely, a) management related stress, b) stress related to salary and trainings, c)
family related stress, and d) stress related to work load, after running factor analysis,
causing 55% total variance explained (at component 4) means that the first 4 factors
together account for 55% of the total variance. Kayser-Meyer-Olkin KMO measure
0.912, value closer to 1 means better indication of appropriateness of factor analysis.
See Appendix A
Same procedure of Factor analysis was used to reduce the statements related to
teaching performance in to two factors, namely, a) teacher performance related to
teaching methods, and b) teacher performance related to time management with the
total variance explained at 65%. See Appendix B.
3.2 Pilot Study
A pilot study was done to check the reliability and validity of the initial questionnaire; it
was conducted on 30 sample size, which was rotated among the faculty members of
Lahore School of Economics. The results helped us in improving the questionnaire
which was used for final research study. The results obtained from pilot study for the
validity / reliability of the scale was significant. Initially, Cronbach’s alpha came 0.84 (job
stress), 0.79 (job satisfaction), and 0.81 (teachers performance). Afterwards
questionnaire was shortened and the questions measuring the teaching performance
were rephrased. Hence the grand cronbach’s alpha was 0.74 after all the amendments,
which indicates that questionnaire has decent significant internal consistency. See
Appendix D
3.3
Statistical Techniques / Model
Through this study we tried to explore the associations between two sets of variables
(job stress and job satisfaction and performance) through canonical correlation. This is
the technique which seldom used with job stress and job satisfaction in Pakistan.
4. Results
4.1
Descriptive analysis:
In this study most of the data is filled by female (157, 52%), aged 25 to 35 (81, 26.9%),
with the degree of MBA/MS/MPhil (109, 36.2%). Mostly female teachers who filled up
the questionnaires were either married (76, 25.2%) or single (71, 23.6%). As far as
teachers’ (both male and female) monthly salary or income, majority of them are taking
salary of Rs.31,000 to Rs.70,000 in private sector universities (26.2% in both
categories). All data indicated that the teachers in this study are working as a
permanent faculty (213, 70.8%). Also it has been seen that majority of the respondents
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
are living in the joint family structure (161, 53.5%), which has been the one of the
factors of causing job stress, less job satisfaction and low job performance, because of
the additional responsibility towards the family. See Appendix E.
As job stress were measured on 36 statements which were reduced into four factors (a)
management related stress (3.24), b) stress related to salary and trainings (4.12), c)
family related stress (3.76), and d) stress related to work load (3.88) after the factor
analysis. The overall mean value (3.85) shows private university teachers are little
stressed up. For job satisfaction, respondents seems neutral in their responses with
mean value (3.3), meaning neither teachers are highly satisfied nor dis-satisfied with
job. With performance it has been observed that as far as teaching performance is
concerned, the mean value came out to be (3.91), which depicts that teachers’ are
satisfied with their teaching performance.
4.2
Canonical Correlation Analysis:
Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) has been used to test the hypothesis. This
statistical technique is used to test the linear relationship between job satisfaction and
job performance (dependent variables) and job stress (independent variable).
The result shows that hypothesis 1 is accepted at 5% level of significance, showing the
canonical correlation coefficient of 0.458 between the sets of job satisfaction,
performance and job stress variables. The output indicates that there is a linear
combination between the set of dependent variables (job satisfaction and job
performance) and independent (job stress) set of variables. The results also indicate
that out of four linear combinations, the first two canonical correlations are acceptable
with a confidence level of 95%. See table 1&2:
Table 1:Canonical Correlations
1
2
3
4
.459
.281
.190
.079
Table 2:
1
2
3
4
Wilk's
.697
.882
.958
.994
Chi-SQ
80.056
27.753
9.514
1.380
DF
24.000
15.000
8.000
3.000
Sig.
.000
.023
.301
.710
SET1Loadings
SET2 Loadings
Jobsatisfaction1
0.720
Mgmt related stress
JobSatisfaction2
0.676
Rc
Jobsatisfaction3
0.518
0.459
Jobsatisfaction4
0.455
stress related to S&T3 0.672
family related stress
0.559
stress from workload 0.516
Teaching Perofrmance1
0.365
Teaching Performance2
0.874
3
0.521
Stress related to salary and training
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
CV1-1(8.2%)
CV2-1 (5.3%)
39.1%
25%
Figure 2 Canonical Correlation of Job Satisfaction, Teaching Performance and Job Stress
Of the six variables included in covariate set 1, those which are highlighted in bold have
significant loadings (jobsatisfaction1,2,3 and teaching performance 2). Together all
variables in set 1 accounted for 39.1% variation, while the other variates, CV2-1, shares
8.2% of its variance with set 1.
Of the four variables in set 2, all of them have significant loadings. Together all four
accounts 25% variance in CV2-1, while the proportion of variance of set-2 explained by
opposite canonical variates share 5.3%.
In order to test the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between the two sets of
variables, we conducted the multivariate test. See table 3&4.The results showed four
different methods to test for statistical significance with multivariate tests. The tests
(Pillai’s, Hotelling’s, Wilk’s and Roy’s) are used to test the full model, i.e. it tests the
shared variance between the dependent and independent variables across all of the
canonical functions. The most commonly used test out of these four is the wilk’s lambda
(λ). According to our study results, it shows that the full model is statistically significant,
with a wilk’s λ of 0.7, F (24, 761.72) = 3.464, p <.05. So, we can reject the null
hypothesis and concluded that there is a statistical significant relationship between the
variable sets.
We also calculated the overall variance of the full model by taking 1 – λ, and we found
an overall effect of 1 - .70 = .3 = Rc2 for the full model. It basically shows that 30%
variance is caused by all the variables included in the full model.
Table 3: Test that remaining correlations are zero:
Wilk's
1
2
3
4
Chi-SQ
DF
Sig.
.697
80.056
24.000
.882
27.753
15.000
.958
9.514
8.000
.994
1.380
3.000
.000
.023
.301
.710
Table 4:
Testname
Value
Pillais
.33163
Hotellings .39582
Wilks
.69668
Roys
.21032
Approx. F
3.32986
3.57064
3.46454
Hypoth. DF
24.00
24.00
24.00
Error DF
884.00
866.00
761.72
Sig. of F
.000
.000
.000
Appendix F indicates the results of second hypothesis. The canonical correlation
between the sets of job performance and sets of job stress were estimated and result
shows that there is statistically significant canonical correlation between the two sets
(0.432). By looking at the result, we can consider hypothesis 2 as valid.
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
4
MStress
TP1
-0.405
0.982
χ1
0.432
η1
-0.087
S&T
Stress
-0.927
-0.154
χ2
-0.663
0.123
-0.124
Family
η2
Stress
-0.914
0.376
-0.116
-0.730
TP2
Work
Load
Stress
Figure 3 Canonical Correlation of Job Stress and Job performance
Figure 3 and Appendix F show the canonical loadings for set 1 (teaching performance)
and set 2(job stress). It can be seen clearly from the results that the proportion of
variance explained by the first set χ1 and second set χ2 is 25%, whereas the job
performance proportion of variance explained by its own canonical variates in two sets
η1 and η2 is 51.1% and 48.9% respectively. Both canonical correlation (.432 and .123)
are significant at 5% level of significance. This led us to say that job performance
especially teaching performance could be affected by job stress. (K.Henson, 2010)
A canonical correlation analysis was also used to test the last hypothesis. The results
indicate that there is a statistically significant correlation (0.379) exists between the sets
of job satisfaction and job stress. See Appendix G, the results indicated that different
stressors could be affected the job satisfaction. Results also showed that management
4
M-Stress is Management related stress, S&T is salary and Training related stress. TP1 is teachers’ performance
related to the teaching methodology and TP2 is the teachers’ performance related to the time management.
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
related stressors and remuneration and training related stressors had a strong
relationship with job stress, -0.928 and -.370 respectively. (1- λ) 20% of variation is
explained by the variates in the model.
Table 7: Canonical Correlations
1
.379
2
.213
3
.156
4
.022
Table 8::
Wilk's
Chi-SQ
DF
1
.797
50.493
16.000
2
.931
15.897
9.000
3
.975
5.586
4.000
4
1.000
.106
1.000
Sig.
.000
.069
.232
.745
5 Conclusion
The relationship between stress and job satisfaction and performance has been
discussed many times in past. Significant results have been achieved which lead to the
point that in any job and task, stress plays an importance role. The same idea was
tested in this paper but with a different statistical style. Results indicated that there is a
significant relationship of stressors on one’s ability to teach which might have an effect
on job satisfaction. Teaching is a profession in which the presence of the satisfaction is
must, because the future of students is in the hands of the teachers. Results showed
that stress related to work load and salary are the most important to teachers’ and they
have more effect on their satisfaction as well.
6. References
Al-Ababneh, M. (2007). The influence of Managerial Leadership style on Employee job
satisfaction in Jordanian Resort Hotels. Journal of Hospitality Management, 1-15.
Armstrong, M. (2003). A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. Kogan
Page Publishers.
Chaudhry, A. Q. (2012). An Analysis of Relationship between Occupational Stress and
Demographics in Universities: The Case of Pakistan. Bulletin of Education and
Research, 1-18.
Ferris, G. R., Bergin, T. G., & Wayne, S. J. (1988). Personal Characteristics ,Job
Performance and Absenteeism of Public School Teachers. Journal of Applied
social psychology, 552-563.
Hatfiled, E., Cacioppo, J. R., & Rapson, R. L. (1993). Emotional contagion. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 96-99.
Ivancevich, ,. J., & Matteson, ,. M. (1980). Stress and Work: A mangerial perspective.
Glenview,IL Scott, Foresman.
Jamal, M. (1984). Job stress and Job performance: An empirical assessment.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1-21.
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
K.Henson, A. S. (2010). Conducting and Interpreting Canonical Correlation Anlaysis in
Personality Research: A User-Friendly Primer. Journal of Personality Assessment,
37-48.
Mathieu, ,. J. (1991). . A cross-level nonrecursive model of the antecedents of
organizational commitment and satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 607–
618.
Moè*, A., Pazzaglia, F., & Ronconi, L. ( 2010). When being able is not enough. The
combined value of positive affect and self-efficacy for job satisfaction in teaching.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 1145-1153.
Mojoyinola, J. (2008). Effects of Job Stress on Health, Personal and Work Behaviour of
Nurses in Public Hospitals in Ibadan Metropolis, Nigeria. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 143-148.
Motowidlo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, M. R. (1986). Occupational stress: Its
causes and consequences for Job Performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology,71,, 618-629.
Moyosola Jude Akomolafe, A. O. (2014). Job Satisfaction among Secondary School
Teachers: Emotional Intelligence, Occupational Stress and Self-Efficacy as
Predictors . Journal of Educational and Social Research, 487-498.
Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance:An
organizational level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,, 963–974.
Rao, V. K. (2001). Teachers Education. New Delhi , India: A.P.H Publishing
Corporation.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist,
68-78.
Sager, J. (1994). A structural model depicting salespeople‟s job stress, . Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 74-84.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2009). Does school context matter? Relations with
teacher burnout and job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 518–524.
SLIŠKOVIĆ,
A.
a.
(2011).
WORK
STRESS
AMONG
UNIVERSITY
TEACHERS:GENDER AND POSITION DIFFERENCES. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol ,
299-307.
Usman, A., Ahmed, D. Z., & Ahmed, I. (2011). Work Stress Experienced by the
Teaching Staff of University of the Punjab, Pakistan: Antecedents and
Consequences. International Journal of Business and Social Science.
Weiss, H. M. (2002). Deconstructing job satisfaction: separating evaluations, beliefs and
affective experiences. Human Resource Management Review, 173-194.
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
APPENDIX - A
Factor Analysis on Stress items Q11-Q37
Bartlett’s test of Sphericity is also statistically significant at 5% level of significance with
p-value (0.00). This tests the null hypothesis that the correlation matrix is an identity
matrix. In this case we reject the null hypothesis
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
APPENDIX – B
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Appendix D
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Appendix E
Descriptive Analysis
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
301
2.71
1.270
301
2.83
1.249
increments
301
3.23
1.349
Valid N (listwise)
301
Question32 I have worries
about my career
development
Question13 Is handling
household chores and an
office job simultaneously,
stressful for you?
Question29 I am not happy
with the salary and
APPENDIX F
Canonical Correlation between Job stress and Job Performance
Canonical Correlations
1
.432
2
.123
Test that remaining correlations are zero:
Wilk's
Chi-SQ
DF
Sig.
1
.801
49.640
8.000
.000
2
.985
3.387
3.000
.336
Standardized Canonical Coefficients for Set-1
1
2
FAC1_1
.982
-.154
FAC2_1
-.087
-.663
FAC3_1
-.124
-.069
FAC4_1
-.116
-.730
Raw Canonical Coefficients for Set-1
1
2
FAC1_1
.982
-.154
FAC2_1
-.087
-.663
FAC3_1
-.124
-.069
FAC4_1
-.116
-.730
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Standardized Canonical Coefficients for Set-2
1
2
FAC1_2
-.376
-.927
FAC2_2
-.915
.405
Raw Canonical Coefficients for Set-2
1
2
FAC1_2
-.376
-.926
FAC2_2
-.885
.392
Canonical Loadings
1
FAC1_1
.982
FAC2_1
-.087
FAC3_1
-.124
FAC4_1
-.116
for Set-1
2
-.154
-.663
-.069
-.730
Cross Loadings for
1
FAC1_1
.424
FAC2_1
-.038
FAC3_1
-.054
FAC4_1
-.050
Set-1
2
-.019
-.081
-.008
-.089
Canonical Loadings for Set-2
1
2
FAC1_2
-.405
-.914
FAC2_2
-.927
.376
Cross Loadings for Set-2
1
2
FAC1_2
-.175
-.112
FAC2_2
-.401
.046
Redundancy Analysis:
Proportion of Variance of Set-1 Explained by Its Own Can. Var.
Prop Var
CV1-1
.250
CV1-2
.250
Proportion of Variance of Set-1 Explained by Opposite Can.Var.
Prop Var
CV2-1
.047
CV2-2
.004
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Proportion of Variance of Set-2 Explained by Its Own Can. Var.
Prop Var
CV2-1
.511
CV2-2
.489
Proportion of Variance of Set-2 Explained by Opposite Can. Var.
Prop Var
CV1-1
.096
CV1-2
.007
APPENDIX G
Canonical Correlation between job stress and job satisfaction
Canonical Correlations
1
.379
2
.213
3
.156
4
.022
Test that remaining correlations are zero:
Wilk's
Chi-SQ
DF
Sig.
1
.797
50.493
16.000
.000
2
.931
15.897
9.000
.069
3
.975
5.586
4.000
.232
4
1.000
.106
1.000
.745
Standardized Canonical Coefficients for Set-1
1
2
3
4
FAC1_1
-.928
.253
-.172
-.214
FAC2_1
-.370
-.619
.530
.446
FAC3_1
.020
.716
.659
.229
FAC4_1
.045
-.198
.506
-.838
Raw Canonical Coefficients for Set-1
1
2
3
4
FAC1_1
-.928
.253
-.172
-.214
FAC2_1
-.370
-.619
.530
.446
FAC3_1
.020
.716
.659
.229
FAC4_1
.045
-.198
.506
-.838
Standardized Canonical Coefficients for Set-2
1
2
3
4
Q38JobSa
.481
-.856
.467
-.907
Q39JobSa
.528
-.350
-.771
1.022
Q40JobSa
.054
.549
1.091
.540
Q41JobSa
.075
1.011
-.633
-.685
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Raw Canonical Coefficients for Set-2
1
2
3
Q38JobSa
.432
-.768
.419
Q39JobSa
.499
-.331
-.729
Q40JobSa
.048
.484
.961
Q41JobSa
.064
.862
-.539
4
-.814
.966
.476
-.583
Canonical Loadings for Set-1
1
2
3
FAC1_1
-.928
.253
-.172
FAC2_1
-.370
-.619
.530
FAC3_1
.020
.716
.659
FAC4_1
.045
-.198
.506
4
-.214
.446
.229
-.838
Cross Loadings for Set-1
1
2
FAC1_1
-.352
.054
FAC2_1
-.140
-.132
FAC3_1
.008
.152
FAC4_1
.017
-.042
4
-.005
.010
.005
-.018
3
-.027
.083
.103
.079
Canonical Loadings for Set-2
1
2
Q38JobSa
.893
-.171
Q39JobSa
.911
.023
Q40JobSa
.671
.444
Q41JobSa
.706
.611
3
.218
-.227
.551
-.194
4
-.355
.345
.221
-.301
Cross Loadings for Set-2
1
2
Q38JobSa
.339
-.036
Q39JobSa
.346
.005
Q40JobSa
.255
.094
Q41JobSa
.268
.130
3
.034
-.035
.086
-.030
4
-.008
.008
.005
-.007
Redundancy Analysis:
Proportion of Variance of Set-1 Explained by Its Own Can. Var.
Prop Var
CV1-1
.250
CV1-2
.250
CV1-3
.250
CV1-4
.250
Proceedings of 28th International Business Research Conference
8 - 9 September 2014, Novotel Barcelona City Hotel, Barcelona, Spain, ISBN: 978-1-922069-60-3
Proportion of Variance of Set-1 Explained by Opposite Can.Var.
Prop Var
CV2-1
.036
CV2-2
.011
CV2-3
.006
CV2-4
.000
Proportion of Variance of Set-2 Explained by Its Own Can. Var.
Prop Var
CV2-1
.644
CV2-2
.150
CV2-3
.110
CV2-4
.096
Proportion of Variance of Set-2 Explained by Opposite Can. Var.
Prop Var
CV1-1
.093
CV1-2
.007
CV1-3
.003
CV1-4
.000