MSU Data Driven Managerial Decision Making and Organizational Effectiveness Essay Review the survey data (available statistics) provided in part B.Based on

MSU Data Driven Managerial Decision Making and Organizational Effectiveness Essay Review the survey data (available statistics) provided in part B.Based on these available statistics, identify main findings revealed by the data (specific factors that actually contributed to the organizational problems at MCF). Volume 15
Issue 2
June 2017
HEC163
Money Cash Flow Inc.: HR Analytics Applied to Employee
Retention and Well-Being Issues – Part B
Case1, 2 prepared by Michel COSSETTE3 and Gabrielle REYBURN4
Money Cash Flow Inc. (MCF), a financial services and insurance company, is facing a problem
with internal and external turnover. The figures documenting the turnover rates clearly show that
they have been rising over the past two years. Employee attitudes and behaviour also seem to
have suffered, according to some managers. And a study by the Human Resources Department
shows that 36% of employees are experiencing stress. To better understand the problem with
turnover, attitudes and stress, the HR department launched a questionnaire-based survey.
February 15, 2016
A total of 215 agents, out of 218, took part in the survey. Two questionnaires were distributed,
two weeks apart. All 218 agents (n = 218) replied to the first questionnaire, and all but 3
answered the second (having been dismissed or left for other reasons). The immediate superiors
of these employees also answered a survey on their employees’ performance.
The average age was 30.27 (standard deviation = 8.38 years). The proportion of women was
58.1%. One third of respondents (34.3%) had a high-school diploma, 33.3% had a college
diploma, 23.9% held an undergraduate degree and 2.8%, a master’s or PhD. Average seniority in
the position was 1 year and 3 months (standard deviation = 1 year and 1 month).
The questionnaires covered different aspects reflecting the company’s needs (see Part A), with
several questions being asked for each one to ensure the reliability and validity of answers.
Table 1, on the next page, shows the aspects measured and when they were measured.
1
Translation from the French by Terry Knowles of case #9 30 2017 001B, “Le cas Money Cash Flow inc. L’analytique RH
appliquée aux enjeux de rétention et de bien-être au travail – Partie B.”
2
Fictional case inspired by real situations. The survey data are drawn from previous studies by the first author. They were
provided by employees from four different organizations and have been anonymized and partly modified to preserve the
anonymity of the organizations concerned.
3 Michel
Cossette is an associate professor in the Department of Human Resources Management at HEC Montréal.
4 Gabrielle
Reyburn is an MSc student in Management at HEC Montréal.
© HEC Montréal 2017
All rights reserved for all countries. Any translation or alteration in any form whatsoever is prohibited.
The International Journal of Case Studies in Management is published on-line (http://www.hec.ca/en/case_centre/ijcsm/), ISSN 1911-2599.
This case is intended to be used as the framework for an educational discussion and does not imply any judgement on the
administrative situation presented. Deposited under number 9 30 2017 001BT with the HEC Montréal Case Centre, 3000 chemin
de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montreal, Quebec H3T 2A7 Canada.
This document is authorized for use only by Zifeng Lin in HRMT 714 Organizational Psychology Spring 2020 taught by RADOSLAW NOWAK, University of Illinois – Urbana-Champaign from
Jan 2020 to May 2020.
Money Cash Flow Inc.: HR Analytics Applied to Employee Retention and Well-Being Issues – Part B
The questions for agents were divided up into two separate questionnaires to avoid participant
fatigue and “automatic answers.” As mentioned above, the two questionnaires were administered
two weeks apart.
Table 1: Information collected and sources
Questionnaires for agents
No. 1
No. 2
Time 1
Time 2
Psychological health and attitudes
– Emotional exhaustion
X
– Overall job satisfaction
X
– Affective commitment
X
Employee turnover
• Intentions regarding the job and Money Cash Flow Inc.
– Move up at Money Cash Flow Inc.
– Leave Money Cash Flow Inc.
X
X
Organizational factors
1. Organizational justice
– Distributive justice
– Procedural justice
– Informational justice
– Interactional justice
2. Work organization
Job-related characteristics
– Work autonomy
– Task variety
– Task significance
– Task identity
Knowledge-related characteristics
– Task complexity
– Information processing
– Skill variety
Social characteristics
– Social support
– Client feedback
– Feedback from manager
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Survey results
Once the data were collected, they were input and analyzed using SPSS. The results are shown
below. Now it is up to Tony Martel and George Douglas to correctly interpret the results and
come up with an accurate diagnosis of the situation, so that they can prepare specific
recommendations and an action plan.
© HEC Montréal
2
This document is authorized for use only by Zifeng Lin in HRMT 714 Organizational Psychology Spring 2020 taught by RADOSLAW NOWAK, University of Illinois – Urbana-Champaign from
Jan 2020 to May 2020.
Money Cash Flow Inc.: HR Analytics Applied to Employee Retention and Well-Being Issues – Part B
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics
Average
Median
Standard
deviation
Social support
Task significance
Task variety
Task identity
Realistic objectives
Skill variety
Autonomy
Feedback from manager
Client Feedback
Information processing
Job complexity
Distributive justice
Procedural justice
Relational justice
Informational justice
Quit intentions –
external2
Quit intentions –
internal3
Emotional exhaustion
Overall job satisfaction
Affective commitment
1 The
Minimum1
Maximum
3.67
4.13
3.97
3.52
3.50
3.74
2.96
4.43
3.68
3.58
2.92
3.02
3.34
4.35
4.04
0.75
0.61
1.02
0.97
0.89
0.77
1.25
0.72
0.87
1.01
0.89
1.02
0.78
0.79
0.86
3.75
4.00
4.00
3.67
3.50
3.80
2.78
4.67
3.67
3.50
3.00
3.00
3.33
4.67
4.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
7.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
3.21
1.69
3.00
1.00
7.00
3.43
2.09
4.00
1.00
7.00
3.89
3.16
4.49
1.59
0.74
1.43
3.75
3.15
4.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
7.00
5.00
7.00
Minimum and Maximum columns indicate the minimum and maximum values of the measurement scales for each variable.
2 “Quit
intentions – external” means that the employee wants to leave the company.
3 “Quit
intentions – internal” means that the employee wants to change positions without leaving the company.
© HEC Montréal
3
This document is authorized for use only by Zifeng Lin in HRMT 714 Organizational Psychology Spring 2020 taught by RADOSLAW NOWAK, University of Illinois – Urbana-Champaign from
Jan 2020 to May 2020.
0.70
0.17*
0.12
0.75
0.40**
0.88
0.30**
0.37**
0.45**
0.27**
0.50**
0.12
0.11
0.23**
0.15
0.28**
0.81
0.23**
0.78
Feedback
from manager
Client
feedback
Information
processing
Job
complexity
Distributive
justice
Procedural
justice
Relational
justice
Informational
justice
Quit intentions
– external
Quit intentions
– internal
Emotional
exhaustion
Overall job
satisfaction
Affective
commitment
0.16*
0.19**
0.21**
0.15*
0.08
0.16
0.12
0.69
0.27**
0.26**
0.32**
0.28**
0.23**
0.35**
0.22**
0.24**
0.69
0.19**
0.17*
0.37**
0.04
0.10
0.44**
0.24**
0.21**
0.39**
0.75
0.39
-0.101
-0.326**
-0.101
0.012
0.109
-0.105
-0.027
0.238**
0.81
0.30**
0.27**
0.10
0.30**
0.38**
0.440***
0.18**
0.31**
0.19**
0.25**
0.03
0.31
0.88
0.36**
0.23**
0.13
0.47**
0.40**
0.14*
0.27**
0.15*
0.20**
-0.03
0.022
0.53**
0.90
0.25**
0.24**
0.08
0.16*
0.29**
0.08
0.19**
0.17*
0.17*
0.02
0.068
0.32**
0.38**
0.78
0.30**
0.24**
0.12
0.23
0.30**
0.22**
0.27**
0.24**
0.24**
0.11
-0.028
0.39**
0.43**
0.76**
0.81
-0.34**
-0.29**
-0.29**
-0.17*
-0.38**
-0.39**
-0.32**
-0.16*
-0.17*
-0.08
0.042
-0.35**
-0.30**
0.18**
-0.26**
0.76
0.00
-0.01
0.05
-0.10
-0.22**
0.02
-0.15*
-0.04
-0.03
-0.02
-0.035
-0.12
-0.09
0.18**
-0.11
0.19**
0.78
-0.23**
-0.12
-0.04
-0.25**
-0.39**
-0.11
-0.26**
-0.08
-0.11
0.01
-0.102
-0.33**
-0.34**
0.23**
-0.29**
0.47**
0.18*
0.85
0.50**
0.37**
0.24**
0.41**
0.51**
0.33**
0.57**
0.27**
0.31**
0.20**
-0.019
0.65**
0.56**
0.41**
0.49**
-0.56**
-0.11
-0.54**
0.84
0.42**
0.40**
0.33**
0.23**
0.40**
0.29**
0.47
0.16**
0.30**
0.16*
0.039
0.42**
0.34**
0.29**
0.34**
-0.55**
-0.08
-0.42**
0.68**
* = p