On-boarding Process of Government Financial Institutions its Effect to

New Employee Job Engagement and Satisfaction

____________________________________

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of
Master in Public Management
major in Human Resource Management

_________________________

by

Deo Michael Angelo M. Olasiman

March 2020
 Chapter 1

The Problem and its scope

Introduction

In most organizations, onboarding process for newly hired employees is

mandatory. It is in the onboarding process where the organization can instill all

necessary information regarding the organization, the culture within the

organization, and what is expected in the newly hires. Onboarding is the process of

helping new hires adjust to social and performance aspects of their new jobs quickly

and smoothly (Bauer, 2010). Research suggests that the first 90 days are crucial

and decide the success of a newcomer in his or her job (Watkins, 2003). There are

two types of onboarding process which is the formal and informal way. Each and

every organization has their own way of implementing their onboarding programs

and may or may not be effective. Unfortunately, many organizations failed to

recognize the importance of onboarding programs, and may not be able to assess

the effectiveness of their onboarding programs. Most organizations do not keep

themselves apprised of best practices, nor are they equipped to determine if and

how to apply them (Stein & Christiansen, 2010).

A study conducted by Sharma and Stol (2019), suggests that successful

onboarding process will result to a high level of job satisfaction. Making newcomers

feel easy into their new job in order to integrate them is critical in designing

onboarding programs. Further, the study suggests that successful onboarding

process will lead to good relationships within the workplace. The new employees “fit

2
in” socially, and may reduce conflicts in the workplace.

A research by Brandon Hall Group (2015) reveals that organizations who fail to

implement standard onboarding process and socialize with company culture would

result to poor performance, lower retention and engagement levels among new

hires. The study found out that organizations with strong onboarding process

improve new hire retention by 82% and productivity by over 70%.

Onboarding process deals with motivating new hires into becoming productive

members of the organization. A widely used model when it comes to motivation is

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. The hierarchy of needs translates each of the major

components of an onboarding program. When analyzed, it demonstrates how each

socialization element, when properly executed, provides to each level of need and

propels an employee to fulfillment through self-actualization (Pike, 2014).

It is unfortunate however, that the importance of onboarding process has been

overlooked by most organizations. A study by Gallup in 2012 reveals that only 12%

of employees strongly agree that their organization does a great job in onboarding.

Another study conducted by Kronos and HCI in 2017 reveals that 76% of the

organizations agree that their onboarding process have been underutilized.

In regarding the working environment of a Financial Institutions, many things

have to be considered aside from service delivery to clients. The Financial

Institution has to comply with all rules and regulations established as expected to all

banking institutions and as well as for all government agencies. With the external

authorities like BSP and AMLC, and COA, Civil Service Commission (for GFIs)

3
closely monitoring the institutions for compliance. And with periodic audit from units

like Internal Audit Group, Security Group, Compliance Group, and Integrated

Management System, the work for employees demands a little margin of error. The

employee has to be knowledgeable enough in what is required by both external and

internal auditors to avoid committing mistakes that leads to non-compliance. Non-

compliance could result to financial losses, reputational risks, disallowance of

benefits and low performance rating for the employees.

Considering that the Financial Institutions’ operations are closely monitored by

both external and internal auditors, it is very crucial for new hires to be

knowledgeable enough about the myriad of requirements that will be examined by

auditors, in order to prevent or mitigate committing mistakes and compromise their

work and the best interest of the institution.

Aside from the compliance to rules and regulations, the new employees also

needs to be acquainted with the various systems they will be using in the course of

their work. Depending on their work designation, an employee in the operations unit

must handle and operate different systems of the institution. Often times, the work

in the institution requires multitasking as the employees are handling multiple

systems. If the employees show some signs of uncertainty or lack of competence in

their work, clients/customers of the Financial Institution may get discouraged in

patronizing the products and services of the institution.

This study is conducted to evaluate the on-boarding process of Government

Financial Institutions by making a reference to best practices. The respondents are

4
the employees that have tenure in the institution for one year and below. The study

aims to measure the level of onboarding effectiveness as being perceived by the

employees and the relationship to their level of engagement with their organization.

The Problem

Statement of the Problem

The present study will assess the on-boarding process of Government Financial

Institutions its effect to new employee job engagement and satisfaction.

Specifically, it seeks answer to the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1 age;

1.2 gender;

1.3 civil status;

1.4 position/designation;

1.5 branch/Business unit

1.6 length of service; and

1.7 educational attainment?

2. What is the extent of effectiveness of the on-boarding process of Government

Financial Institutions as perceived by the respondents?

3. What is the extent of job engagement of the newly-hired employees?

4. What is the extent of job satisfaction of the newly-hired employees?

5
5. Is there a relationship between the extent of effectiveness, job engagement and

job satisfaction?

6. Is there a relationship between the profile, extent of effectiveness, job

engagement, and job satisfaction?

Theoretical Framework of the Study

This section of the study includes the theoretical models that would bridge the

gap between observations and outcomes of on-boarding process.

Hierarchy of Needs Theory

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology which was fully

introduced by Abraham Maslow in 1954 in his book Motivation and Personality. This

theory is used to explain how people are motivated.

The Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is one model that would translate to each of

the major components of an onboarding program (Pike, 2014).

6
Figure 1. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs model.

The five categories of needs according to Maslow that translates to major

components of onboarding:

Physiological Needs. Physiological needs refer to basic human survival needs

such as food, water, and shelter. In regards to HR Management, these needs are

achieved through the selection process. For example, when a new employee is

hired, he or she will receive a pay check and be able to obtain the essential

physiological needs for survival. Therefore, an employee enters the onboarding

process with this first level already fulfilled (Stein & Christiansen, 2010).

Safety and Security Needs. Safety and Security needs refer to human needs of

order and stability. Effective onboarding programs offer safety and security needs

through structure and organization. For example, onboarding programs that follow a

structured agenda and execute formal, organized events and activities will help fulfill

7
new employees’ needs for safety and security. Onboarding programs that are more

unstructured and informal do not guide employees and set the proper limits to

ensure that this level is fulfilled (Stein & Christiansen, 2010).

Needs for Belonging. Needs for Belonging refers to the human need for

interaction with and acceptance by others. These needs are realized in onboarding

through various opportunities for social interaction with fellow new hires and co-

workers, typically those who have the most in common. When new employees have

an opportunity to interact with peers, they will feel more comfortable and accepted

in their new setting. By gaining the acceptance of co-workers early on in their time

with the company, new hires are more likely to have a stronger connection to the

company and feelings of anxiety and fear regarding social acceptance are eased

(Stein & Christiansen, 2010).

Needs for belonging are also realized through networking opportunities with

various workers throughout the company. Not only does this help new employees

gain context and valuable resources,but it also allows them to experience

acceptance at an organizational level as opposed to just within their specific

department or silo (Stein & Christiansen, 2010).

Self-Esteem Needs. Self-esteem needs refer to humans’ need to feel good

about themselves. This includes self-respect, achievements, status and importance.

Onboarding fulfills a person’s self-esteem needs by outlining how each individual

employee fits into the larger organization as a whole. Effective onboarding

programs demonstrate to new hires why their individual role is important and how

8
they contribute towards the strategic goals and objectives of the organization (Stein

& Christiansen, 2010).

Self-Actualization. Self-actualization is the highest level of fulfillment that a

person can reach. It includes the need for realizing one’s full potential and

continuously seeking personal growth. Effective onboarding processes include

elements that help new hires see opportunities for potential career growth within the

company. If a new hire can see a path for career development within the

organization, he or she will be less likely to leave the company and seek other

career opportunities. Showing new employees how they can grow with the company

will help them reach self-actualization within their work environment (Stein &

Christiansen, 2010).

Conceptual Framework

Employee
Job Satisfaction

Onboarding Process
Employee Profile
of Institutions

Employee
Job Engagement

Figure 2. Conceptual framework.

The study will focus on the onboarding process of Financial Institutions,

9
employee job satisfaction and work engagement.

In any organization a newly-hired employee undergoes onboarding process, the

outcome of the onboarding process affects the job satisfaction and work

engagement of the employee. If the employee perceives a positive extent of

effectiveness of onboarding process, then the employee will most likely have a

positive level of job satisfaction and engagement; however when an employee

perceives a negative extent of effectiveness of onboarding process, then the

employee will probably have negative level of job satisfaction and engagement.

Significance of the study

The most valuable asset in an organization is human resource, it is therefore

important that the onboarding process of the new hires is effective enough in order

to produce a work force that will positively impact the organization’s productivity,

performance, retention, and culture.

It is in onboarding that new hires will decide to be engaged in the organization

or will either become disengaged. It is also in onboarding process that creates

impressions to the new hires will reverberate all throughout their career in the

organization.

The research findings about onboarding process and its effect to employee

engagement will be an important source of information that will benefit several

groups as follows:

For the Financial Institution’s management, the results of the study will provide

10
an overview if the current onboarding process of the organization is positively or

negatively perceived by the new hires. It will create and opportunity to develop a

better onboarding process as part of organization’s business strategy.

For the Financial Institution’s Human Resource Management Department

(HRMD), the results of the study will provide insights to the HRMD who is

responsible in developing a competent and productive workforce. The HRMD may

directly request the organization’s top management for enhancements to the current

onboarding programs if deemed necessary.

For the researcher, the study will provide information to researcher on the

importance of onboarding process, and its impact to the new hires. The study will

provide information on some factors that will positively or negatively affects the

outcome of an onboarding process and its relationship to job satisfaction and

engagement.

For the future researcher, the study provides information to the future

researcher in the furhter study of onboarding process and its effects, and may be

used as reference in determining the variables to use and the measurement of the

variables.

Scope and Limitation of the Study

The study will determine the level of engagement of some newly hired

employees of Financial Institutions including Government Financial Institutions

(GFIs) within Negros and Siqujor Branches/Offices taking into consideration the

onboarding process they have went through in the institution.

11
 Due to the limited time and resource of the researcher, the data gathering will

cover only to the new hires of Financial Institutions who are designated/assigned

within Negros and Siquijor.

The respondents of the study are employees of Financial Institutions who are

still within one year and below tenure in the organization.

The data gathering procedure will be through dissemination of survey

questionnaires to the new hires within the selected branches of Financial Institutions

within Negros and Siquior. The success of the study will be determined if all

questionnaires disseminated to employees are fully accomplished and have been

submitted back to the researcher within the prescribed time.

Definition of Terms

This section presents the operational definition of the key terms in this study.

Extent of effectiveness of onboarding - refers to the newly-hires’ perception of

effectiveness of onboarding process they have undergone in their organization.

Extent of job engagement - refers to the newly-hires’ self perception of their

engagement towards their jobs.

Extent of job satisfaction - refers to the newly-hires’ self perception of their

satisfaction towards their jobs.

Financial Institution - a company/corporation who engage in business including

but not limited to financial and monetary transactions like deposits, loans,

investments, and currency exchange.

12
GFI - Government Financial Institution, a company/corporation owned by the

government which specifically engage in business including but not limited to

financial and monetary transactions like deposits, loans, investments, and currency

exchange.

Job/Work Engagement - refers to the new hires’ attitude towards their work and

their outlook to the organization. It may reflect the way they value the organization.

Job Satisfaction - the extent to which an employee feels self-motivated, content &

satisfied with his/her job.

New Hires - refers to the newly hired employees of an organization having a tenure

one year and below.

Onboarding - a mechanism through which new employees acquire the necessary

knowledge, skills, and behaviors to become effective members of an organization.

Onboarding Process - refers to the way an organization handles the process to

orient, train, socialize, and immerse the new hires into their work and into the

organization.

Self efficacy - the belief of the new hires on how they can effectively do their jobs

and accomplish their assigned tasks.

Turnover - when a new hire quits a job and has to be replaced by hiring another

employee.

Related Literature

13
Onboarding

Employee onboarding is an important process in every organization since in this

process, the employees gain skills, knowledge, and resources they need to be

productive in their work. The benefits derived from onboarding process are not only

for new employees but for the organization as well. With successful onboarding,

there is higher productivity, better satisfied customers, and positive growth for the

organization. Regardless of the size of the organization, onboarding is fundamental

to strategic talent management because its impact from positive or negative

onboarding experience reverberates throughout the employees’ career and affects

retention, performance, and succession opportunities (Joseph & Sridevi, 2015).

According to Bauer (2010), research and conventional wisdom both suggest

that employees get about 90 days to prove themselves in a new job. Every

organization has its own version of the complex process through which new hires

learn attitudes, knowledge, skills and behaviors required to function effectively.

Academic researchers who study onboarding also use the term organizational

socialization. No matter what the terminology, the bottom line is that the faster new

hires feel welcome and prepared for their jobs, the faster they will be able to

successfully contribute to the organization’s mission.

According to the research publication by Partnership for Public Service and

Booz Allen Hamilton (2008), the onboarding process should be up to the first year of

the newly-hired employee, this is the last phase of their onboarding process model.

The last phase, “first year,” refers to the time in between the new employee’s first

14
three months and the end of the first year of employment. For most agencies,

formal activities related to onboarding do not extend into this period. But for the

employee, the feeling of newness and the accompanying learning curve linger.

Continued support during this time can increase an employee’s contribution to an

organization’s mission and help speed employees to full productivity

An additional benefit of more actively engaging a new employee through a

structured and long-term onboarding program is the ability to more accurately

assess the new employee over the course of the initial probationary period (one

year in some institutions). Comprehensive onboarding programs can set high

performers on the path to productivity and success more quickly. However, a good

onboarding program can also help to identify individuals that are not a good

organizational or occupational match. The enhanced focus on employees

throughout their first year provides greater opportunity for managers and peers to

assess the new employee during this time. (Partnership for Public Service and Booz

Allen Hamilton, 2008)

The formality and comprehensiveness of onboarding programs varies widely

across organizations, and those considered “best in class” for onboarding have

more formal onboarding programs (Martin & Lombardi, 2009).

One of the first things HR managers should consider is whether their firm is

served best by informal or formal onboarding. Informal onboarding refers to the

process by which an employee learns about his or her new job without an explicit

organizational plan. On the other hand, formal onboarding refers to a written set of

15
coordinated policies and procedures that assist an employee in adjusting to his or

her new job in terms of both tasks and socialization. (Zahrly & Tosi, 1989)

Research shows that organizations that engage in formal onboarding by

implementing step-by-step programs for new employees to teach them what their

roles are, what the norms of the company are and how they are to behave are more

effective than those that do not. (Bauer et.al., 2007)

Onboarding has four distinct levels, the Four C’s (Bauer, 2010). Compliance is the

lowest level and includes teaching employees basic legal and policy-related rules

and regulations. Clarification refers to ensuring that employees understand their

new jobs and all related expectations. Culture is a broad category that includes

providing employees with a sense of organizational norms - both formal and

informal. Connection refers to the vital interpersonal relationships and information

networks that new employees must establish.

The building blocks of successful onboarding are often called the Four C’s. The

degree to which each organization leverages these four building blocks determines

its overall onboarding strategy, with most firms falling into one of three levels

(Bauer, 2010).

According to Stein & Christiansen (2010) most onboarding programs have other

shortcomings. Organizations present same orientation material to every new hire,

regardless of their level of career experience, defined role or responsibilities. Most

organizations have little idea how successful the process is, and what metrics do

exist are too broad and not tied to specific program goals since no single

16
department oversees or retains accountability for the onboarding process.

Administered by Human Resources, Recruiting, or Learning and Development,

most programs do not possess buy-in from functional or business line management.

Further, most organizations do not keep themselves apprised of best practices, nor

are they equipped to determine if and how to apply them. Onboarding programs, as

a result, tend to remain static and unresponsive to newly adopted company

strategy, marketplace changes, or new measures adopted by competitors.

Beyond the short-term issues related to employees’ initial adjustments, many

long-term outcomes of onboarding affect an organization’s bottom line. When

surveyed, organizations perceive effective onboarding as improving retention rates

(52%), time to productivity (60%) and overall customer satisfaction (53%)

(Aberdeen Group, 2006). For employees, long-term outcomes of good onboarding

include job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Maier & Brunstein, 2001)

Measurement the effectivess of onboarding program

Since onboarding is an important process in facilitating new hires into becoming

productive members of an organization, it is just important to measure the impact of

onboarding practices including pre-hire activities, orientation, and business specific

training, in order to justify investment.

A research by Baek & Bramwell (2016), identified three methods of measuring

effectiveness of onboarding process. First is employee feedback, which is by far the

most predominant method of measurement. When obtaining feedback from

onboarding participants, it is important to understand what is to be measured.

17
Successful onboarding programs ensure that employees achieve role clarity, self-

efficacy, social integration, and knowledge of culture. Use employee surveys to

target these key adjustment indicators as well as subjective individual outcomes

associated with them, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment, stress,

intention to remain, and engagement. Request survey responses at regular intervals

throughout the onboarding process to address any questions, concerns, and

suggestions that may arise.

Second method of measuring onboarding effectiveness is looking into retention

rates. Retention outcomes are of high interest due to their direct relation to financial

outcomes. Effective onboarding practices reduce turnover rates, and more

specifically dysfunctional turnover rates. Consistent measurement of turnover rates

allows an organization to compare year over year the impact of their onboarding

practices. Dysfunctional turnover measures whether the employees leaving the

organization have a significant impact on the organization, or in other words the

extent to which high value employees are leaving. Throughout this process, it is

important to keep in mind that onboarding is only one of the many reasons why an

employee may leave an organization (Baek & Bramwell, 2016).

Third method of measuring onboarding effectiveness is to take note of the time

to proficiency. Time to proficiency is the length of time it takes for a new hire to

reach full productivity according to an organization’s standards. Use time to

proficiency to measure whether onboarding practices are effective in preparing

employees to work independently. While difficult to quantify directly, onboarding is

an important mechanism to improve employee time to proficiency. One approach to

18
quantifying time to proficiency is by using perceived time to proficiency. Perceived

time to proficiency data can be gathered through a survey questionnaire designed

to address effects of onboarding practices on the employee’s transition. While

effective for statistical analysis, the data source itself may not be objective (Baek &

Bramwell, 2016).

Employee engagement

According to an article published by Globe Philippines (2017), the financial

industry is not known to have positive impression with the public considerably due

to incidents of technical failure in some banks. People are very concerned with the

money they put in banks, therefore the banks needs to be extra careful in managing

their systems as to avoid incidents of system errors that will put them to public

ridicule.

The employees in the financial industry have to face the negative impressions

while doing all the work in the institution, a survey by TINYPulse in 2019 revealed

that only 26% of the employees feel that that they are highly valued in their work.

With high stress levels, employers in the financial sector face high turnover rate and

absenteeism. High turnover rates also means financial losses in any business.

Several factors have been attributed to high turnover rate but low employee

engagement plays a significant part. Employee engagements addresses employee

concerns and at the same time helps improve overall performance that has positive

impact to the organization and its clients, and in turn result to better customer

service, bigger revenues and growth.

19
 Highly motivated employees are reliable performers who can efficiently address

customers’ concerns and helps sustain the institution’s client base. Eventually,

engaged employees can also be considered as "brand ambassadors" and provide

more value to the business by helping win more customers through excellent

service.

Kahn (1990) as cited in Carter et.al. (2016) suggested that an individual’s

attachment to, or detachment from, their role, varies under a range of conditions. He

changed the terms ‘attachment’ and ‘detachment’ to personal ‘engagement’ and

‘disengagement’, respectively, to account for the psychologically complex social

world of organizational life. Kahn defined engagement as ‘the simultaneous

employment and expression of a person’s ‘preferred self’ in task behaviors that

promote connections to work and to others, personal presence (physical, cognitive,

emotional), and active, full role performances (Kahn, 1990, p. 700). This original

concept of engagement, as well as others we draw on here, considers engagement

as a malleable state that varies within persons as well as between persons

(Sonnentag et.al., 2010)

Since Kahn, other definitions of employee engagement have emerged,

including those of ‘a persistent, positive, affective-motivational state of fulfillment

that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption’ (Maslach, Schaufeli, &

Leiter, 2001) and ‘an individual’s sense of purpose and focused energy, evident to

others in the display of personal initiative, adaptability, effort, and persistence

directed toward organizational goals’ (Macey et al., 2009). Common to these

definitions is the notion that employee engagement is both a ‘motivational state

20
reflected in a genuine willingness to invest focused effort towards achieving

organizational goals’ (Mauno et al., 2010) and a ‘work-related psychological state’

(Macey & Schneider, 2008) in which ‘affect’, defined as the experience of feeling or

emotion, occurs (Hogg, Abrams, & Martin, 2010). It is this emphasis on affect that

makes employee engagement clearly distinct from self-efficacy.

Employee engagement is a broad construct that touches nearly all branches of

human resource management facets known hitherto. If every component of human

resource were not well addressed with proper approach, employees would fail to

fully engage themselves in their job roles thereby leading to mismanagement

(Markos and Sridevi, 2010).

Three types of engagement

According to the Gallup, the Consulting Organization, there are mainly three

types of engagement that occur in the organization. All are different in terms of

involvement and their role in the organization. Types of employee engagement are:

1. Engaged employees

2. Not engaged

3. Actively disengaged

Engaged employees

An engaged employee is considered as the base of the organizational

development. Such kinds of employees carry the organization in positive direction.

They not only perform their work but also play an important role in achieving the

21
organizational goals and objectives. Engaged employees want to use their talent

and strength at work every day. They perform with passion, drive innovation and

move their organization forward through their performance (Vazirani, 2007).

Not engaged

These kinds of employees care only about their work not any other things like

goals, objectives and development of the organization. They do not have energy

and enthusiasm in their work (Reilly, 2014). These categories of employees do not

have cooperative relationship with their colleagues as well as the employers also.

Their contribution is little in the success and development of the organization.

Actively disengaged

Actively disengaged employees do not perform their work in a proper manner

and do not complete their work timely. Their contribution is almost negligible in the

success and development of the organization. They are unhappy at work and look

after the work of the other member of the organization. Such kinds of employee

carry the organization in the negative direction and organization suffers in achieving

its goals and objectives (Vazirani, 2007).

Motivation

According to Galloway (2016), a simplistic overview of motivation theory says

needs drive behavior to reach satisfaction and avoid dissatisfaction. There are

many types of needs. Consider Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: physiological, safety,

love or belonging, esteem and self-actualization. These needs largely move from

22
external motivation to internal motivation. They also reflect the evolution many

companies attempt when the moving their cultures from have-to cultures - e.g.,

keeping their jobs and benefits and providing for their families, which are largely

fear-driven needs - to want-to cultures - e.g., friendships, self-esteems, challenges,

senses of contribution and accomplishments.

Motivated people are excited and have energy they want to use to make things.

However, motivation is not aimless. Rather, it has a specific focus on what those

motivated are fixated on. In addition, if the high energy and focus do not result in

productive action, they were not truly part of motivation. Motivation is high-level

energy focused on productive action (Galloway, 2016).

Motivation is different than engagement. An employee might be engaged in

something but not absorbed in it because he or she is feeling a sense of "have to."

Motivation is the "why" or reason why employees act; engagement is typically the

"what." However, engagement can also be an emotional commitment (Galloway,

2016).

Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction is an attitudinal variable that comes about when an employee

evaluates all the components of her or his job, which include affective, cognitive,

and behavioral aspects (Weiss, 2002). Increased job satisfaction is associated with

increased job performance, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), and

reduced turnover intentions (Wilkin, 2012). Moreover, traditional workers nowadays

are frequently replaced by contingent workers in order to reduce costs and work in a

23
non-systematic manner. According to Wilkin’s (2012) findings, however, contingent

workers as a group are less satisfied with their jobs than permanent employees are.

According to Robbins & Judge (2013), when people speak of employee

attitudes, they usually mean job satisfaction, which describes a positive feeling

about a job, resulting from an evaluation of its characteristics. A person with a high

level of job satisfaction holds positive feelings about his or her job, while a person

with a low level holds negative feelings.

Job satisfaction is not just about job conditions. Personality also plays a role.

Research has shown that people who have positive core self-evaluations who

believe in their inner worth and basic competence are more satisfied with their jobs

than those with negative core self-evaluations. Not only do they see their work as

more fulfilling and challenging, they are more likely to gravitate toward challenging

jobs in the first place. Those with negative core self- evaluations set less ambitious

goals and are more likely to give up when confronting difficulties. Thus, they’re more

likely to be stuck in boring, repetitive jobs than those with positive core self-

evaluations (Robbins & Judge, 2013).

Related Studies

Per internet research, no related studies were found evaluating the onboarding

process of new hires specifically in Philippine financial institutions. Moreover, no

related studies were found evaluating the engagement among employees

specifically in Philippine financial institutions. Thus, the following studies were being

reviewed to examine the importance of onboarding process and its effect to

24
employee self-efficacy and engagement.

A research made by Pike (2014) was to investigate the effectiveness of

onboarding programs in producing an employee fit in order to reduce voluntary turn-

over rates within organizations. The research stated that there are high intensity

onboarding programs as well as low intensity onboarding programs. The high

intensity onboarding programs are basically more of the institutional methods and

on the other hand, low intensity onboarding programs is more on the individualized

approaches. The research analyzed the results of previous studies looking into the

different approaches of socialization to new hires. The different approaches to

socialization can be broken down into six approaches, which were developed by

Van Maanen & Schein (1979). The findings of the research showed that high

intensity onboarding programs are partially effective in producing an employee fit.

The findings of the research also proved that all institutional approaches in

socialization are effective in reducing voluntary turn overs.

A study was conducted by Sharma and Stol in 2019, exploring the onboarding

success of IT professionals. The researchers were interested in studying the

onboarding success of IT professionals since the IT industry is known to be one of

the highest when it comes to employee turnover rate. They have established the

basic onboarding activities based on previous studies and use them as factors in

determining onboarding success with newly hired IT professionals. The study also

seeks to find out if onboarding success is positively related to job satisfaction, if

onboarding success if positively related to quality of workplace relationships.

Further, the study also seeks to find out if job satisfaction is negatively associated

25
with turnover intention and if workplace relationship quality is negatively associated

with turnover intention. The result of the study shows that among the established

onboarding activities, support is found to be the largest and most significant factor

associated with onboarding success while training does not seem to be effective in

achieving a successful onboarding. Other finding of the study is that onboarding

success is positively related to job satisfaction and workplace relationship. Further,

high job satisfaction would result to lower turnover intention while workplace

relationship bears no effect in attaining a low turnover intention. In addition, job

satisfaction fully mediates the relationship between onboarding success and

turnover intention.

A study conducted by Lepold, Tanzer, & Jimenez (2018), to examine

expectations of bank employees on the influence of key performance indicators

(KPIs) and the relationship between job satisfaction and work engagement. Their

survey was conducted online and they have a total of 136 participants which are

bank employees who are having contact with clients. The measures of the study

includes professional self efficacy, influence expectations on economic KPIs,

influence expectations on bank-specific KPIs, job satisfaction, work engagement.

The results of the survey were analyzed using SPSS version 24, and all variables

were transformed to z-values to get standardized variables. The study has reached

a conclusion that influence expectations on bank specific KPIs are predictive of job

satisfaction and influence expectations on economic KPIs are predictive of work

engagement above and beyond professional self-efficacy. The study has promoted

that employees should be able to know the goals of their organization, with

26
feedback systems of KPIs, to enhance job satisfaction and work engagement and

futher organizational productivity.

A study by Lilin & Wang (2018) seeks to assess the determinants of employee

engagement in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in China. The study

uses quantitative research methods using an online survey with participants that are

employees in various SMEs in China. The measures of the study include self

efficacy, organizational commitment, and employee engagement. The results of

survey supports that self-efficacy have positive correlation with organizational

commitment and high level organizational commitment has significant impact on

employee engagement, and organizational commitment is a mediator between self-

efficacy and employee engagement.

A study conducted by Jena et.al. (2017), seeks to determine if employee

engagement is positively related to organizational trust. Engagement is an

indication that the employee trusts the organizational values and hence is keen on

contributing to it in order to attain business goals. The trust factor gets enhanced

when it is perceived that the organizational engagement norms are fair in having a

defined reward, recognition and succession planning in the organization (Jena

et.al., 2017).

According to the conceptual framework of the study, a mediating factor that

affects the relationship between employee engagement and organizational trust is

psychological well-being (PWB). A model of PWB as proposed by Ryff (1989) is

comprised of the following dimensions: positive relationship, environmental mastery,

27
self-acceptance, autonomy, personal growth and purpose in life. Another mediating

factor that affects the relationship between employee engagement and

organizational trust is transformation leadership. Four dimensions of

transformational leadership as proposed by Bass (1997) includes: idealized

influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized

consideration that might lead to individual well-being and organizational growth.

The study conducted a survey with employees from multi-national service

industries in eastern India. The respondents were employed in banking and

insurance sectors and posted around several units around eastern India. The

researchers distributed 600 survey questionnaires and received 562 responses, 511

of which were considered to be usable for further statistical analysis. The mediation

approach of their study was based on Baron & Kenny (1986), and it was found that

both psychological well-being and transformational leadership were significantly

mediating the causal relationship between employee engagement and

organizational trust. The findings of the study proved that engagement sets a clear

connection between employee and organizational performance, and providing a

better understanding of organizational objectives. The positive inter-dimensional

correlation among transformational leadership, psychological well-being and

organizational trust supports the earlier work of Den Hartog & Belschak (2012)

proving that employees' perceiving their leader as ethical and trust worthy reports

more psychological engagement with their job assignment.

A study was undertaken by Andrew & Sofian (2012), to investigate the

individual factors which affects employee engagement, and employee engagement

28
(independent variables) that affects work outcome outcomes (dependent variables).

In this study, employee engagement is classified into two: job engagement and

organization engagement. Variables comprising the individual factors include:

employee communication, employee development, and co-employee support. The

work outcomes includes the following variables: job satisfaction, organization

commitment, intention to quit, and organizational citizenship behavior. The social

exchange theory was used as the theoretical underpinning.

The participants of the study were 104 HR officers at the Inland Revenue Board

of Malaysia. The participants were selected via simple random sampling. A survey

questionnaire was used to collect data on the variables. The findings of the study

reveals that the participants’ scores for organization engagement were significantly

higher than job engagement. The study also found out that individual factors

predicts job engagement and organization engagement, in this particular study the

individual factor - co-employee support predicted both. In addition, the findings of

this study supported that social exchange theory (SET) can be used as a theoretical

framework in understanding the construct of employee engagement. This means

that the employees who have perceived support from co-employees are more likely

to reciprocate with greater level of job engagement and organization engagement;

employees who are provided with adequate development (training, skills and

learning) are more likely to be more engaged in their job role and organization roles;

and would repay with greater organization engagement. Thus, engaged employees

have positive behaviors, attitudes, intentions derived from a high level mutual

relationship with their co-employees and their employer.

29
 A study based on systematic review of literature on employee engagement was

conducted by Bedarkar & Pandita (2014). The researchers identified three key

drivers of employee engagement namely: communication, work life balance, and

leadership, which have impact on employee and organizational performance.

Leadership research shows that certain leadership behaviors have clear

association with engagement constructs such as motivation, job satisfaction,

organizational commitment, proactive behaviors and organizational citizenship

behavior. Trust in leader, support from the leader, and creating a blame-free

environment are considered as components of psychological safety, a condition

proposed by Kahn, which leads to employee engagement (Xu & Cooper, 2010).

Work life balance emerged as an important driver of employee engagement.

Work-life balance, in its broadest sense, is defined as a satisfactory level of

involvement or ‘fit’ between the multiple roles in a person’s life. The ability of the

employee to find time for his work and family was a crucial factor to the success of

his performance at the workplace. Work Life Balance usually refers to one of the

following: organizational support for dependent care, flexible work options, and

family or personal leave (Estes & Michael, 2005).

Communication plays an important role in ensuring employee engagement,

MacLeod & Clarke (2009) emphasize employees require clear communication from

superiors to relate their role with leadership vision. Further, they identify poor

communication as a barrier to engagement. Engagement is affected by internal

communication. Internal communication is an organizational practice, which

30
effectively conveys the organizational values to all employees and thus, obtains

their support in reaching organizational goals. Thus, internal communication is

crucial for ensuring employee engagement (Welch, 2011).

A case study conducted by Kaliannan & Adjovu (2015), explored the strengths

and weaknesses of employee engagement strategies implemented by a

telecommunications organization in Ghana. The study was able to gather 137

completed survey questionnaires from employees of the telecommunications

company as the respondents. The five independent variables used as effective

employee engagement strategies are: work environment, HRM practices,

employee-supervisor relationship, job satisfaction, and organizational culture. The

analysis of the data gathered indicated that all the engagement strategies of the

company are generally effective. This turns to explain the good performance of the

company in its industry. In the data analysis, work environment turned out to be the

least of the engagement strategy, the company should make measures to address

the improvement of its work environment.

A study by Belias et.al (2015), measure the levels of job satisfaction among

employees in the Greek banking organization. The variables that they have

identified which can positively or negatively impact job satisfaction among the Greek

bank employees are autonomy and role conflict. The dimensions of job satisfaction

that were measured in the study include: Working conditions, Salary, Promotions,

Work itself, Immediate superior, and the organization as a whole. For the

measurement of role conflict, the Role Questionnaire (Rizzo, House, & Lirtzman,

1970) was used. And for the measurement of employees’ autonomy, a scale

31
developed by Beehr (1976) was used. The respondents of the study were 344

employees of Greek banks.

The result of data analysis showed that role conflict did not seem to have direct

negative effects on the aspects of job satisfaction. The only factor affected was

promotion opportunities. This finding suggests that employees who are forced to

carry on duties that are too demanding for them and conflict with their abilities,

attitudes and expectations believe that the position they hold does not offer them

the opportunity to prove their value and expand their potential. In addition,

employees who have to work with people with different beliefs, behavior and ways

of working are less effective in their work and, perhaps, less productive. For this

reason, they have lower expectations of career development and promotion

opportunities.

When it comes to autonomy and its expected regulatory role in the relation

between role conflict and job satisfaction, data analysis found that employees did

experience high autonomy in their workplace, so they probably can deal with

conflicting situations and solve problems. This means that those employees who

have a lot of say and more freedom than others could also have a more clear and

realistic image about what is expected from them and be able to work in a way that

appeals to them and makes them more effective.

A study by Saner & Eyupoglu (2015), investigated if job satisfaction exists

among bank employees in North Cyprus. The study instrument used was the short

form Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) which measures job satisfaction

32
using 20 facets of the job. The researcher were able to receive back 702 survey

questionnaires from North Cyprus bank employees as respondents. Data analysis

consisted of the computation of descriptive statistics in order to examine the job

satisfaction levels of the respondents.

The data analysis from the study show that bank employees are satisfied with

their job overall as well as the intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of their job. The six

main sources of dissatisfaction are responsibility, independence, policies and

practices, advancement, compensation and variety indicating to bank authorities

that steps need to be taken to develop and implement human resource

management policies towards the improvement of the undesirable conditions and

the strengthening of the desirable conditions. For example, training and

development programs can be developed to improve the skills and knowledge of

employees as well as enriching their job, contributing to the various aspects of job

and to help develop career paths for them thus contributing to the satisfaction of the

“advancement” aspect of their job.

Research Methodology

Research Design

The current study is designed as a quantitative study. A survey design will be

used to determine the extent of effectiveness of onboarding process as perceived

by the respondents. The same method will be used to determine the extent of job

satisfaction and extent of job engagement of the respondents.

After determining the extent effectiveness of onboarding process, extent of job

33
satisfaction, and extent of job engagement among the respondents, a correlational

research design is used to determine the relationship between extent of

effectiveness of onboarding process and employees’ extent of job satisfaction and

job engagement. The study will also find out if there is a relationship between the

respondents’ profile, effectiveness of onboarding process, job satisfaction and job

engagement.

Research Respondents

Research respondents are the new hires of Financial Institutions assigned at

Negros and Siquijor Branches, having a tenure of one year and below with the

institution.

Research Environment

The study is conducted to Financial Institutions specifically to branches/offices

located within Negros and Siquijor.

Research Instrument

The instrument used to gather information from the respondents is a survey

questionnaire. The survey questionnaire has four parts:

Part I assessed the profile of the respondents. The respondent will have to

choose an answer from a set of choices per item.

Part II assessed the respondents perception to the level of effectiveness of the

onboarding process in their institution.

34
 Part III assessed the respondents self perception of his/her level of job

satisfaction.

Part IV assessed the respondents self perception of his/her level of job

engagement.

The 5-point Likert scale model is used to measure numerically the responses of

the respondents in Part II to Part IV of the questionnaire.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher will ask for permission from the concerned Financial Institution

through its management to conduct a study as well as data gathering through

survey questionnaires from its employees. Before dispersing the questionnaires, the

validity and reliability of the instruments will be tested first by three expert. Any

comments or suggestions from the experts after testing the instrument will be taken

into consideration for the improvement of the research instrument.

Since the location of the branches/offices are quite far (more than 200km apart),

survey questions will be sent via email to the selected employees. Accomplished

survey questionnaire forms will be scanned and will be sent to the researcher via

email. Another option to deliver the survey questions is thru online survey if it is

possible.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The research tools that were used by the researcher in analyzing the data were

the following:

35
 Percentage. This was used to show how a part is related to a whole. It was

used in presenting the profile of the respondents.

Formula:

part
Percentage= ×100
whole

Where:

part = frequency of respondents in a particular category

whole = total number of respondents

Weighted Mean. This was used to get the extent of (a) onboarding process of

the employees, (b) job satisfaction of employees, and (c) job engagement of

employees.

Formula:

wx̄ =
∑ fx
n
Where wx̄ = weighted mean/average
x = rating

n = total number of employees

f = frequency/number of employees who

responded in a particular category
∑fx = sum of all the products of frequency and the rating

The following scale was also applied:

5-Point Likert’s Scale

36
 Range Verbal Description

4.21 – 5.00 SA - Strongly Agree

3.41 – 4.20 A - Agree
2.61 – 3.40 N - Neutral
1.81 – 2.60 D - Disagree
1.00 – 1.80 SD - Strongly
Disagree

Chi-square. This was used to determine the relationship between the profile of the

employees and the extent of (a) onboarding effectiveness, (b) job satisfaction, and (c)

job engagement. This tool is considered since the data are categorized.

Formula:

( fo − fe )❑2
x 2=∑
fe

where:
x2 = chi- square
fo = observed frequency
fe = expected frequency

Contingency Coefficient (c). This was used in identifying the degree or strength of

association between the two variables.

Formula:

where: x2 = chi- square value

37
 N = grand total of observations

To describe the strength of association or relationship, the following were

used:

Legend: Value of c Strength of Association

> 0.5         High Association
0.30 - 0.50          Moderate Association
0.10 - 0.29        Low Association
0.00 - 0.09        Very Low

Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient (r s). This was used to determine

the relationship between the extent of effectiveness and job satisfaction and job

engagement of employees. This tool is considered since the data are in ordinal

scale.

Formula:

where r s = Spearman rho

d2 = sum of the squared differences between ranks
n = total number of respondents

To describe the strength of relationship, the following were utilized:

Legend: Value of r Strength of Relationship

Between ± 0.50 to ± 1.00 ± strong relationship

38
 Between ± 0.30 to ± 0.49 ± moderate relationship

Between ± 0.10 to ± 0.29 ± weak relationship

Ethical Considerations

The concerned Financial Institution will be sent a request for permission first

before conducting a survey. The respondents will be informed briefly of the

objective of the study and the required survey. The respondents will be asked for

their consent, if they are willing to participate in the conduct of a survey. Survey

forms and results of the survey will be kept confidential. Access to data from the

conducted survey will only be exclusive to the researcher.

39
References

Andrew, O.C. & Sofian, S. (2012). Individual Factors and Work Outcomes of
Employee Engagement. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 40, 498-508.

Baek, P., & Bramwell, S. (2016). How do you measure the impact of effective
onboarding practices? Retrieved from Cornell University, ILR School site:
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/student/136

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.

Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited.

Journal of Management, 38(1), 9–44.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in

social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical
considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.

Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactionaletransformational leadership paradigm

transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist,
52(2), 130-139.

Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. M., & Tucker, J. S. (2007).
Newcomer adjustment during organizational socialization: A meta-analytic
review of antecedents, outcomes and methods. Journal of Applied Psychology,
92, 707-721

Bauer, T.N. (2010). Onboarding employees: maximizing success. SHRM

Foundation p.12

Bedarkar, M. & Pandita, D. (2014). A study on the drivers of employee engagement

impacting employee performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
133, 106-115

Belias, D., Kousteliosb, A., Sdroliasc, L., & Aspridis, G. (2015). Job Satisfaction,
Role Conflict and Autonomy of employees in the Greek Banking Organization,
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 175, 324 – 333

Beehr, T. A. (1976). Perceived situational moderators of the relationship between

subjective role ambiguity and role strain. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 35-
40.

Carter, R.W., Nesbit, P.L., Badham, R.J., Parker, S.K. & Sung, L. (2016): The

40
 effects of employee engagement and self-efficacy on job performance: a
longitudinal field study, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1244096

Chhajer, R, Rose, E. & Joseph, T. (2018). Role of Self-efficacy, Optimism and Job
Engagement in Positive Change: Evidence from the Middle East. The Journal for
Decision Makers, 43(4) 222–235.

Den Hartog, D.N., & Belschak, F.D. (2012). Work engagement and
Machiavellianism in the ethical leadership process. Journal of Business Ethics,
107(1), 35-47.

Estes S. B. & Michael J. (2005). Work-family policies and gender inequality at work:
A Sloan Work and Family Encyclopedia entry. Retrived from
http://workfamily.sas.upenn.edu/search/apachesolr_search/estes.

Filipkowski, J., Heinsch, M., & Wiete, A. (2017). New hire momentum: Driving the
onboarding experience. Cincinnati OH: Human Capital Institute.

Galloway, S.M. (2016). Motivation or Engagement? What's the Difference?

Retrieved from https://proactsafety.com/articles/motivation-or-engagement-
whats-the-difference

Gallup (2017). State of the American workplace. Retrieved from

www.gallup.com/workplace/238085/state-american-workplace-report-2017.aspx

Globe Telecom Phils. (2017). Employee Engagement: An Investment in the

Challenging Financial Industry. Retrieved from
https://www.globe.com.ph/business/enterprise/blog/employee-engagement-in-
the-financial-industry.html

Jena, L.K., Pradhan, S., & Panigrahy, N.P. (2018). Pursuit of organizational trust:
Role of employee engagement, psychological well-being and transformational
leadership. Asia Pacific Management Review 23, 227-234

Joseph, D. & Sridevi, S. (2015). Effective onboarding as a talent management tool

for employee retention. International journal in management and social science,
3 (7), 7

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and

disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.

Kaliannan, M. and Adjovu, S.N. (2015). Effective employee engagement and

organizational success: a case study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

41
 172, 161-168.

Laurano, M. (2015). The true cost of a bad hire. Brandon hall group.

Lepold, A., Tanzer, N. & Jiménez, P. (2018). Expectations of Bank Employees on

the Influence of Key Performance Indicators and the Relationship with Job
Satisfaction and Work Engagement. Soc. Sci. 2018, 7, 99; Basel, Switzerland:
MDPI.

LiLin & Wang, S. (2018). Self-efficacy, Organizational Commitment and Employee

Engagement in Small and medium-sized enterprises. International Journal of
Business Marketing and Management (IJBMM), 3 (4), 35-39.

MacLeod, D. and Clarke, N. (2009). The MacLeod Review – Engaging for Success:
Enhancing Performance though Employee Engagement. Department for
Business Innovation and Skills. London, Crown Copyright.

Maier, G., & Brunstein, J.C. (2001). The role of personal work goals in newcomers’
job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A longitudinal analysis. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 86, 1034-1042

Markos, S. and Sridevi, M.S. (2010). Employee engagement: The key to improving
performance. Int. J. Bus. Manage., 5: 89-95.

Martin, K., & Lombardi, M. (2009). Fully on-board: Getting the most from your talent
in the first year. Boston, MA: Aberdeen Group.

Partnership for public service and Booz Allen Hamilton (2008). Getting on board: A
model for integrating and engaging new employees. Retrieved from
https://ourpublicservice.org/publications/getting-on-board-a-model-for-
integrating-and-engaging-new-employees/

Pike, K.L. (2014). New employee onboarding programs and person-organization fit:
an examination of socialization tactics. Seminar research paper series. Paper 24

Rizzo, J., House, R., & Lirtzman, S. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex
organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15, 150-163.

Robbins, S. & Judge, T. (2013). Organizational behavior. 15 th Ed. Prentice Hall.

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of

psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6),

42
 1069-1081.

Saner, T., & Eyupoglu, S.Z. (2015). The Job Satisfaction of Bank Employees in
North Cyprus. Procedia - Economics and Finance 23 ( 2015 ) 1457-1460.

Sharma, G. G. & Stol, KJ. (2019). Exploring onboarding Success, organization fit,
and turnover intention of software professionals. The journal of systems and
software. pp. 1-14

Sonnentag, S., Dormann, C., & Demerouti, E. (2010). Not all days are created
equal: The concept of state work engagement. Work engagement: A handbook
of essential theory and research, 25–38

Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance:

A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240–261.

Stein, M.A. & Christiansen, L. (2010). Successful onboarding a strategy to unlock

hidden value within your organization. New York: McGraw Hill/Kaiser associates
inc.

TINYpulse (2019). The 2019 Employee Engagement Report. Retrieved from

https://www.tinypulse.com/hubfs/EE%20Report%202019.pdf

Watkins, M. (2003). The first 90 days. Boston, MA. Harvard business school press.

Weiss, H. M. (2002). Deconstructing job satisfaction: Separating evaluations, beliefs

and affective experiences. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 173–
194.

Welch, M.(2011). The evolution of the employee engagement concept:

Communication implications. Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, Vol.16. Issue: 4. pp.328-346.

Wilkin, C. L. (2012). I can’t get no job satisfaction: Meta-analysis comparing

permanent and contingent workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 47–
64.

VanMaanen, J., & Schein, E. H. 1979. Toward a Theory of Organizational

Socialization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1: 209-264.

Vazirani, N. (2007). Employee engagement. Working paper series (WPS05), SIES

College of Management Studies. Retrieved from http://www.siescoms.edu/
images/pdf/reserch/working_papers/employee_engagement.pdf

43
Xu, J., & Cooper-Thomas, H.D. (2010). How can leaders achieve high employee
engagement? Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 32(4), 399-
416. doi:10.1108/01437731111134661

Zahrly, J., & Tosi, H. (1989). The differential effect of organizational induction
process on early work role adjustment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10,
59-74

44