1.

0 INTRODUCTION The nature or environment of an organisational does give an impact to the employee and also to the management with exclusively will navigate the company toward the company direction or another way around. Corporate Governance, Company Mission and Vision, Company Structure and etc are greatly effect the employee motivation and lead to the company direction. A transparence management always allows their employee to voice out their concern and ideas. By this the employee feel appreciated and lead to the positive motivation to the company. This report covers the interest on how has the organisational change effected the employee turnover. Commonly, when the organisational change; the management direction does change according to the new Top Management direction and this will lead to a new era of the company which will not fully welcome by the employee especially for the elderly people in the company. A coherent result affecting with people psychological when been ask to change to something more stringent from what they been doing during the past. Basically the new organization will have a different direction and approach toward the company structure, policy and procedure to meet the company mission since the organizations is complicated, unexpected and hardly to manage. (Bolman and Deal 2009 p. 41) In Work Organisational System point of view, there was four district frames in an organisational which is structural frame, human resource frame, political frame and symbolic frame. (Bolman and Deal 2008 p.18) Therefore; Reframing an organization will not be a simple swap where the management should clarify their direction and ensure the employee are well understand with the management direction without fail.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE With focus on an organisation, this report cover the relevant issue that may lead to how the organisational change affects the employee turnover. Analysis on research or study journal will be use to collect the findings and literature

review about this issue. The findings on organisational change and employee turnover will be discussed in this report. People does come and go, regardless of the better offer, this report will focus on the internal and external issue between the employee and the employer that may lead to the employee to leave the company. The company and management should consider before they make any decision to change.

3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW / FINDINGS There is no exact reason on why people left an organisation (Lee and Mitchell, 1994). The issue is subjective to talk hence it all depend on the organization and people inside it. The organisational change happen in many ways, in example; changing of new management team, changing of organization structure and it all depend on a company direction toward share holder request. Referring to Morrel and e.t al, (2004) the reason people choose to leave is significantly because of the voluntary, rather than involuntary turnover that concern of organisation and organisational theorist. Some of the MNC company does not have any option in deciding their company vision or structure hence they need to obey to Mother Company or Regional Office that their reporting to order. As a group of company, the MNC company must obey with the mother company direction and vision and this is also one of the reason why the employee leave a company. The employee could not make any decision especially on the company direction or budget where they need to bow with the mother company control. The underbounded power constraint would lead chaos for the manager where they could not simply make any decision without approval from the mother company but normally there is a limitation amount of budget that requires mother company approval before the top management makes any decision on the company. The conflict on organisational change does effects people reason to leave as mention by Lee et. al s (1999) regarding Unfolding Model. This concept is strengthening the Hom and Griffeth (1995) findings on reason of people

leaves. It is significantly shows the people wisdom and how the employee reacts toward a voluntary turnover as decision to quit. This action refer as shock as what been describe by Lee and Mitchell (1994) nevertheless it is essential that this problem is unforeseen happen even among a loyal employee. The activities occur mainly due to the unsatisfied employee toward the changes. This shock will distract the employee motivation and feel uncomfortable with the organization. Some of the reason is due to the offer by other company toward the employee especially for the experience people to leave the existing company. Lee and Mitchell (1994) define the measured organization change in term of; internal resources where most describe on how in impact the employee or in term of external context where the change involve the necessities of the imposition of change at organisational. As one of the contribution factor, employee psychological need also play a role that may lead to employee turnover. Cited from Lee and Mitchell, 1994, the employee turnover could be contributed by four reasons and it state as; 1. As change increase, the number of shock-induced quits will increase. 2. There will always be a base level of unavoidable turnover, which will increase as the overall level of change increases. 3. However, some of the decisions to quit will also be avoidable; in other words, they could be reduced by intervention. 4. In a time of change, there will be scope to manage turnover effectively, by selectively reducing the level of avoidable quits through informed intervention. From the above findings, we can say that when the organization change they should aware of the consequence where it will increased the turnover because change in work process or daily routine will greatly increase the possibility of the shock incidence. The turnover is avoidable but it all depends on the company on how their counter offers their employee. Some of the company does restrain their good employee but offering them a better offer or promoting them to other level with new competitive task.

There is no argument that employee turnover is demand for high costing (Griffeth et al., 2000; Kininki et al., 2002 Price, 2001; Mobley, 1982) wherefore the cost incurs on training cost for the new employee, the delay of the job due to the less employee and etc this high cost has limit the company return and gradually affected the company revenues. Another factor that contributes to the employee turnover is divide into three categories which is work-related factor, individual factor or the external factor (Cotton and Turttle, 1986). An employee is an asset to a company but when the extrinsic and intrinsic requirement is not been fulfill, the employee psychology will be dreadful and the motivation of the employee wont be as good as what been expected by an employee. This will lead to the employee without a commitment and not doing their job full hearted. While recognizing the employee psychological need is crucial to be meet hence it involve the compliance and identification towards the extrinsic rewards. This would give more value to the employee as they feel comfortable and secure with the organization. This value was discuss by OReilly and Chatman (1986, p.493) in the research of Kelmans theme. Despite psychological need for the positive working environment, the job description itself does play a role in order to avoid the employee to leave. A collective job description allow employee to give and gain. With a tolerable job description it will satisfy the employee as written by (Locke, 1976; Robbins and Coulter, 1996) where they agrees that employee feeling may lead to job satisfactory in works. Referring to Tian-Foreman, W.A, (2009), job satisfaction is different between country and strengthen by Price (2001) that job satisfaction-turnover differ by occupational group. It proves that employees around the world have a different needs but the essential of both western and Chinese turnover pattern are significantly mention about job satisfaction. Tian-Foreman claiming that the higher satisfaction on the job will greatly reducing the employee turnover. Job satisfaction internally or externally towards the employee has play a role

in scheming the employee turnover. The issue also touch by other writer such as (Bluedorn, 1982), (Griffeth et al., 2000). , Lam et al. (2001). Job satisfaction turnover towards relationship across occupational groups also one of the key point that need to be considered. The high turnover between support staff and manager is mostly support staff align with salary, interpersonal skills and centralization (Price, 2001) Above description shows the job satisfaction is differ among the occupational group and nation. This is slightly contributed by a lot of factor such as life style, country, culture, and etc It is significant for Organisational to define the job description and satisfaction for their employee before they are framing their organization.

4.0 CONCLUSION In MNC companies, organisational change might happened an unvoid by a company due to the share holder or mother company order. The limitation of underbounded power might drive the organisational to change. Most of the change is contribute by the political power that mainly beyond the management control. E.g: the appointment for a new General Manager in MNC Company is control by Parent Company and even top management of the company cannot argue anything on it. This change will influence the employee decision to quit when the pattern of work change and lead to upset among employee. Upset will lead to unfavorable feelings and enforce the unavoidable turnover towards the organization. This unavoidable turnover reacts as a sunk cost to a company whereby the time and cost taken to retrain the new employee even to retrain a new manager will greatly impact the company expenses. Despite of organisational change, employee psychology is crucial where it lead to employee motivation. Organisational change will lead for new direction

for a company and it structure. The new structure will lead to a new process or job description among employee. A new job description for the employee in nowadays basically required for multi tasking task will head to dissatisfaction among employee. The dissatisfaction later on will lead the employee to quit but this action normally happen to middle management of an organization. Job satisfaction-turnover differs by occupational group. It prove that employee around the world have a different needs that highlight by Price (2001) as salary, interpersonal skills and centralization. It is prejudiced to fulfill all the employee needs but the psychological need is critical due to first law Maslow theory of requirement to feel secure. This is the basic thing to be complete by an employer where it also play role to motivate the employee. Despite the relationship between manager and non-managers, power and pay toward managers should be balance with the non-manager or lower workers needs such as monthly benefits, medical care and employees provident fund are perform robustly. This to react with Cotton and Tuttle (1986), that mention about manager are less turnover due to power and well paid.

5.0 REFERENCE Morrel, K.M. Loan-Clarke, J. and Wilkinson, A.J. (2004), Organisational Change and Employee Turnover, Loughborough University Business School, Loughborough, UK. Bolman, L.G. and Deal, T.E. (2008), Reframing Organisations: Choice and Leadership, 4th edition, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Artistry,

Bennet, H. and Durkin, M. (1999), The Effects of Organisational Change on Employee Psychological Attachment: An Exploratory Study. Dennis, B.P. (2007), Leadership The journey Continues. OReilly, C. and Chatman, J. (1986), Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: the effect of compliance, identification and

internalization on prosocial behavior, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No 3, pp. 492-9. Kelman, H.C (1958), Compliance, identification and internalization; three processes of attitude change, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 51-60. Lee, T.W. and Mitchell, T.R (1994), An alternative approach: the unfolding model of voluntary employee turnover, Academy of Management review, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 51-89. Lee, T.W., Mitchell, T.R, Holtom, B.C., McDaniel, L.S. and Hill, J.W. (1999), The Unfolding Model of Voluntary Turnover: a replication and extension, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 450-62. Hom, P.W. and Griffeth, R. (1995), Employee Turnover, South Western Publishing, Cincinnati, OH. Locke, E.A. (1976), The Nature and Consequences of Job Satisfaction. Handbook of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, Rand-McNakky, Chicago, IL. Robbins, S.P. and Coulter, M. (1996), Management, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Griffeth, R.W., Hom, P.W. and Gaertner, S. (2000), A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium, Journal of Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 463-88. Kinicki, A.J., McKee-Ryan, F.M., Schriesheim, C.A. and Carson, K.P. (2002), Assessing the construct validity of the job descriptive index: a review and meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 14-32. Price, J.L. (2001), Reflection on the determinants of voluntary turnover, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 600-21. Mobley, W.H. (1982), Employee Turnover: Causes, Consequences, and Control, Addison-Wesley Publishing, Reading. MA.

Cotton, J. and Tuttle, J. (1986), Employee turnover: a meta-analysis and review with implication for research, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 55-70. Tian-Foreman, W.A, (2009), Job Satisfaction and Turnover in the Chinese Retail Industry, Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. Bluedorn, A.C. (1982), The Theories of Turnover: Causes, Effects, and Meaning, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT. Lam, T., Baum, T. and Pine, R. (2001), Study of managerial job satisfaction in Hong Kongs Chinese restaurants, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 35-42.