4.7 Article

Factors Affecting Employee's Retention: Integration of Situationa Leadership With Social Exchange Theory

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.872105

关键词

compensation; staff retention; working environment; job satisfaction; sustainable leadership

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on the Social Exchange Theory and the Situational Leadership Theory, this study investigated the relationship between training and development, work environment, job satisfaction, and employee retention. The results showed that training and development, work environment, and job satisfaction have a positive impact on employee retention, while transformational leadership did not moderate their direct relationship. This study contributes to the literature on employee retention and leadership.
Sketching on the Social Exchange Theory (SET), the present study aims to investigate the direct relationship between training and development, work environment, and job satisfaction with employee retention. The contingent role of transformational leadership was also analysed under the Situational Leadership Theory (SLT). Accordingly, we collected data from 287 employees of SMEs in northern China by employing a convenience sampling approach, exhibiting a response rate of 57.40 percent. The Partial Least Square-Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) analysis was then run to test the proposed hypotheses. The findings revealed a significant positive impact of training and development, work environment, and job satisfaction on employee retention. However, no moderating effect of transformational leadership was indicated on their direct relationship. This study has enriched the literature on employee retention and the leadership arena. To the best of the authors' knowledge, there is no prior evidence concerning the study's integrated relationship of the continuous variables. The implications and limitations were finally expressed at the end of this manuscript.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据