You are on page 1of 8

Introduction

Nepotism is a common practice at work places. Nepotism can be defined as, is a practice of providing jobs to friends and family members. Practice of appointing relatives and friends in one's organization to positions for which outsiders might be better qualified. Despite its negative connotations, nepotism (if applied sensibly) is an important and positive practice in the startup and formative years of a firm where complete trust and willingness to work hard (for little or no immediate reward) are critical for its survival. Employee turnover is a ratio comparison of the number of employees a company must replace in a given time period to the average number of total employees. A huge concern to most companies, employee turnover is a costly expense especially in lower paying job roles, for which the employee turnover rate is highest. Many factors play a role in the employee turnover rate of any company, and these can stem from both the employer and the employees. Wages, company benefits, employee attendance, and job performance are all factors that play a significant role in employee turnover. Hypothesis of the study is as under; H1 ----- Nepotism affects the employee turnover. The qualitative method will be used in the research for purpose of collection of data. We will gather the data from the persons who have left any organization. And it will be asked whether the nepotism was the reason of leaving the organization. Sample size of 30 persons will be used and data will be collected in this regard. Data can be collected from both male and female members.

The objective of the study is to identify the affect of Nepotism at work places and on turnover of the employee. Our findings will help the organization or HR specialists to know that if nepotism is a factor of employee turnover in the organization.

Litrature review
Just sharing a similar background and being in friendship or kinship with someone suffices to encourage people to ask favors and exchange favors in areas characterized by rational and legal regulations (Aktan, 1992:31; Akalan, 2006:113). Favoritism is a form of corruption but it can be distinguished from other forms of corruption, such as bribery, because it does not usually involve a direct exchange of material favors. Compared to bribery, favoritism creates a more implicit, indirect, and unspecified return obligation (Loewe et al.,2008: 259-261). Favoritism can only be based on sentimentality and caprice, not on sound morality (Cottingham, 1986:362). The word favoritism itself generally evokes negative images of corruption as common thinking suggests in a favoritist exchange two sides might gain something but everyone else loses (Lee, 2008:1408). Favoritism is more common where there are ingroup and out-group bias. Ingroup favoritism is a tendency to treat people in one s own group preferentially. Sheriff s (et.al, 1961) In-group favoritism is found in a wide variety of situations, from naturalistic settings gender or ethnic background to the extremely artificial settings used in Tajfel s (Billig & Tajfel, 1973; Tajfel et.al., 1971). Favoritism also depends on the comparison of group outputs or welfare of groups. For example Chen et al. (2002) found that greater collectiveprimacy led to morein-group favoritism when the in-group performed better or worse than out-group Prendergast and Topel (1996) suggest that subjectivity opens the door to favoritism; evaluators act on personal preferences toward subordinates to favor some employees over others. Nepotism is mostly seen in the societies in which

traditional ties and relations are strong (Aktan, 2001:57).Attempts to distinguish between the causes of voluntary and involuntary turnover in organizations, though recognized for quite some time, received little attention from researchers (Shaw et al., 1998). Saiyadain & Ahmad, 1997) indicating the propensity of employees quitting their jobs when working conditions are not conducive. The study conducted by Saiyadain and Ahmad (1997) on Malaysia found that 90% and 68% of workers in the private and public estates, respectively, indicated that what they hated most is poor working conditions in their estates. This is confirmed by the response of the estate managers. Herzberg (1966) in his two-factor theory of motivation, mentioned an array of factors like achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility, possibility of advancement, salary, possibility of growth, job security, interpersonal relationship, technical supervision, agreement with company policy, administration, work condition, and personal life, that impacts job satisfaction, which in turn influences an employee s intentions to stay or quit his organization. Obviously, organizational factors play a crucial role so far as employees turnover intentions are concerned. Wunder et al. (2001), in his research found job stressors to have a direct and negative effect on the managers job satisfaction, which, resulted in reduced organizational commitment that led to intentions of quitting and finally the actual quitting from organization. The relationship between supervisory support and turnover intention was also testified by a few researchers (Hatton et al., 1998; Munn et al., 1996). Even the gender of supervisor was found to have a significant impact on employees intentions to quit. In a large-scale survey of 12,000 young working Americans, it was observed that employees, who had a female manager perceived relatively reduced job responsibility and had higher job search intentions as compared to those employees who had a male manager (Valentine et al. 2001). A study on association between social comparison and turnover intentions revealed a negative relationship between downward comparison and turnover intentions.

Additionally, downward comparison was found to be positively related to career satisfaction. Conversely, upward comparisons were observed to be positively associated with both turnover intentions and career satisfaction (Eddleston, 2009).Denison (1996) defines organizational culture as the embedded structure of organizations, which is rooted in the values, beliefs, and assumptions held by organizational members.

References
Aktan, Co kun Can (1992), Politik Yozla ma ve Kleptokrasi: 1980-1990 Trkiye Deneyimi, stanbul: Alfa Yay nc l k. Loewe, Markus; Blume, Jonas and Johanna Speer (2008), How Favoritism Affects the Business Climate: Empirical Evidence from Jordan , M ddle East Journal, Vol.62, No.2,pp.259-276. Cottingham, John (1986), Partiality, Favouritism and Morality , The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 144, pp.357-373. Khatri, Naresh; Cheng Ya Wen, Lee Wan Fuei, and Tjeng Ai Geok (2008), Crony sm: Antecedents And Consequences , SABRE Working Papers, 10-99, 1-46. Khatri, Naresh; Cheng Ya Wen, Lee Wan Fuei, and Tjeng Ai Geok (2008), Crony sm:Antecedents And Consequences , SABRE Working Papers, 10-99, 1-46. Prendergast, Canice and Robert H. Topel (1996), Favoritism in Organizations , Journalof Political Economy, Vol.104, No.5, pp. 958-978. Aktan, Co kun Can (1992), Politik Yozla ma ve Kleptokrasi: 1980-1990 Trkiye Deneyimi, stanbul: Alfa Yay nc l k.

Shaw, J. D., Delery, J. E., Jenkins, G. D. Jr., and Gupta, N. (1998). An organization-level analysis of voluntary and involuntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 41(5), 511 525. Saiyadain, M. S., and Ahmad, Z. A. (1997). Human resource management in Malaysian oil palm estates. Unpublished project report, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang. Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and Nature of Man, The World Publishing Company, New York. Wunder, R.S., Dougherty, T.W. & Welsh, M.A. (1982). A causal model of rolestress and employee turnover. Proceedings Academy of Management, 42, 297301. Munn, E.K., Barber, C.E., Fritz, J.J. (1996). Factors affecting the professional well-being of child life specialists. Children s Health Care, 25, 71-91. Valentine, S., Godkin, L., Turner, J.H. (2002). Women s management perceivedjob responsibility, and job search intention. Women in Management Review, 17 (91), 29-38. Eddleston, K.A. (2009). The effects of social comparisons on managerial careersatisfaction and turnover intentions. Career Development International, 14(1), 887-110. Denison, D.R. (1990). Corporate Culture Effectiveness, JohnWiley & Sons, New York, NY,. and Organisational

Research Plan
The qualitative method will be used in the research for purpose of collection of data. We will gather the data from the persons who have left any organization. And it will be asked whether the nepotism was the reason of leaving the organization. Sample size of 30 persons will be used and data will be collected in this regard. Data can be collected from both male and female members. The timing will be set for the purpose of interviewing the respondents. And in this regard personal contacts are also used and visits to the organizations are also used. Conversations with the people who recently leaved any organization will be conducted that tell us that whether the nepotism is the bsae or factor of turnover or not. 2500 Rs will be the budget of the research which will also include travelling cost for the data collection. After data collection the data will be analyzed and paper will be designed for the results.

Topic:

Effect of Nepotism on employee turnover

Summary
In this study effect of nepotism on employee turnover will be identified. With the help of the study we will try to identify the relationship between the variables and also the relationship extent between the variables. Nepotism and employee turnover are defined firstly. Only the qualitative method is used in the study which will consist of short interviews of respondents who leave any organization recently. This study will help the organization to reduce its employee turnover if it is causing by Nepotism. This will also help in creating a strong and longterm relationship between the employer and employee. 20 days will be the estimated time of the research. For data collection the organizations will be visited and personal contacts will also be used for collection of data regarding the research purposes.

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

SUBMITTED TO: SIR SHEIKH USMAN SUBMITTED BY: MOHAMMAD ADEEL ASLAM ROLL NO: M10MBA016 SEMESTER: 3RD MBA (B&F)

HALIEY COLLEGE OF BANKING & FIANACE PUNJAB UNIVERSITY LAHORE