Mohammad Ahmad Hussain

7/31/2019 Mohammad Ahmad Hussain

1/94

A STUDY ON WORKPLACE VIOLENCE FACTORS IN

UNIVERSITY UTARA MALAYSIA

A thesis submitted to College of Business

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Human Resource Management

University Utara Malaysia

By:

Mohammad Ahmad Mohammad Hussain

Mohammad Ahmad Hussain, May 2009. All Rights Reserved


2/94

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful and Most Compassionate.

First, I would like to express my appreciation to Allah, the Most Merciful and, the

Most Compassionate who has granted me the ability and willing to start and complete

this study. I do pray to His Greatness to inspire and enable me to continue the work

for the benefits of humanity.

I would like to extend my heartfelt appreciation and deep gratitude to my project

supervisor, Assoc.Prof Dr. Husna Johari, who had provided continuous guidance,

encouragement, support and advice in assisting me to complete this research paper.

Her remarkable ways and professionalism in explaining and guiding me throughout

the completion of this research has allowed me to see things in a more rational and

critical view. I am also grateful for the encouragement that I received from my family,

especially my Dad, Mom, Brothers and Sisters. Their outstanding patience and

unconditional love in supporting my quest and love for education has been

extraordinary.

Special thanks my dearest friend Choo, who had given time, understanding and

support through all the phases of this research, Thank you.

Finally, I wish to thank my dearest friends Anas, Ammar, Yasser, Hussain, Paramjeet

and my lecturers in University Utara Malaysia, for all their help.

Thank you

Mohammad Ahmad HussainCollege of Business



3/94

i

DECLERATION

The author is responsible for the accuracy of all opinion, technical comment, factual

report, data, figures, illustrations and photographs in this dissertation. The author bears

full responsibility for the checking whether material submitted is subject to copyright or

ownership right. UUM does not accept any liability for the accuracy of such comment,

report and other technical and factual information and the copyright or ownership rights

claims.

Mohammad Ahmad Mohammad Hussain

College of Business


06010, Sintok

Kedah, Darul Aman, Malaysia

11th, May 2009


4/94

ii

PERMISSION TO USE

In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a postgraduate

degree from the University Utara Malaysia, the author agree that the University Library

may make it freely available for inspection. The author further agree that permission for

copying of this thesis in any manner in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be

granted by my supervisor or in their absence by the Dean of the Graduate School. It is

understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or parts thereof for

financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood

that due recognition shall be given to me and to University Utara Malaysia for any

scholarly use which may be made of any material from my thesis. Requests for

permission to copy or to make other use of materials in this thesis, in whole or in part,

should be addressed to:

Dean of Postgraduates and Research

College of Business,

University Utara Malaysia,

06010 Sintok,

Kedah Darul Aman, Malaysia.


5/94

iii

ABSTRAK

Kajian ini dijalankan untuk mengkaji perhubungan antara persekitaran tempat kerja,

perhubungan antara rakan sekerja serta gaya pengurusan dengan keganasan di tempat

kerja di Universiti Utara Malaysia. Pemboleh ubah bebas ialah keganasan di tempat kerja

manakala pemboleh ubah terikat ialah persekitaran tempat kerja, perhubungan rakan

sekerja dan gaya pengurusan.

Kajian ini dijalankan secara kuantitatif di mana data-data diperoleh melalui kajian

pengedaran borang soal selidik kepada 102 respondent yang berada di peringkat

pengurusan dan dipilih secara rawak di institusi pengajian awam di negeri Kedah. Data

yang dikutip dianalisa dengan menggunakan perisian SPSS (Statistical Package for Social

Science) versi 16.0.

Hasil kajian menunjukkan perhubungan yang siknifikan antara pemboleh ubah bebas

iaitu persekitaran kerja dan pemboleh ubah terikat iaitu keganasan di tempat kerja.

Manakala dua pemboleh ubah bebas yang lain iaitu perhubungan antara rakan sekerja dan

gaya pengurusan didapati tidak ada perhubungan yang siknifikasi dengan keganasan di

tempat kerja.


6/94

iv

ABSTRACT

The main purpose of this study is to examine is there any relationship between

working environment, co-worker relationship, and management style and workplace

violence in University Utara Malaysia. The dependent variable is workplace violence.

The independent variables are working environment, co-worker relationship, and

management style.

This study is conducted quantitatively where data is collected through distribution

of questionnaires to 102 respondents of employees of the managerial level and selected

randomly in a public learning institution in Kedah. The data that have been collected

were processed using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) 16.0 software.

The findings show that there is a positive significant relationship between

working environment and the workplace violence, while the other factors, co-worker

relationship and management style, shows no relationship with the workplace violence.


7/94

v

TABLE OF CONTENT

PAGE

PERMISSION TO USE i

DECLERATION ii

ABSTRAK iii

ABSTRACT iv

TABLE OF CONTENT v

LIST OF TABLES ix

LIST OF FIGURES x

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT 3

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 4

1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 5

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 5

1.6 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS 7

1.6.1 Workplace Violence 7


8/94

vi

1.6.2 Management Style 8

1.6.3 Working Environment 8

1.6.4 Co-Worker Relationships 8

1.7 CONCLUSION 8

CHAPTER 2

LITRETURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION 9

2.1.1 Types of workplace violence 11

2.2 CASUAL FACTORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE 13

2.2.1 Social learning theory 14

2.2.2 Working Environment 16

2.2.3 Management Style 19

2.2.4 Co-workers relationships 21

2.3 PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE AT WORKPLACE 23

2.4 RESEARCH FRAME WORK 25

2.5 JUSTIFICATION OF HYPOTHESES 27

2.5.1 Hypothesis 1 27



9/94

vii


2.6 CONCLUSION 28

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 INTRODUCTION 29

3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN 29

3.3 SOURCES OF DATA 30

3.3.1 Primary Data 30

3.3.2 Secondary Data 30

3.4 SAMPLING DESIGN 31

3.5 UNIT ANALYSIS 32

3.6 ORGANIZATION BACKGROUND 32

3.7 DATA COLLECTION METHOD 33

3.8 MEASUREMENT 33

3.8.1 Questionnaire 33

3.9 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES 35

3.9.1 Frequency Distribution 35

3.9.2 Reliability Analysis 35


10/94

viii

3.9.3 Hypothesis Testing 36

3.9.4 Pearson Correlation Coefficient 36

3.10 PILOT TEST 37

3.11 CONCLUSION 39

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND FINDINGS

4.1

INTRODUCTION 40

4.2 SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS 404.3 SAMPLE PROFILE (RESPONDENTS PROFILE) 414.4 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS 424.5 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS 444.6 RESTATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS 444.7 TEST OF HYPOTHESES 454.8 CONCLUSION 48

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATION, AND CONCLUSION

5.1 INTRODUCTION 495.2 RECAPITULATION OF THE STUDY 505.3 DISCUSSION 51

5.3.1 Research Question One 52


11/94

ix

5.3.2 Research Question Two 55

5.3.3 Research Question Three 56

5.4 THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS 57

5.5 PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS 58

5.6 LIMITATIONS 59

5.7 RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE STUDIES 59

5.8 CONCLUSION 60

REFERENCES 62

APPENDICES

LIST OF TABLES PAGE

Table 2.1: Situations of violence that occur inside and outside the workplace 11

Table 3.1: The layout of the questionnaires 34

Table 3.2: The Range and Interpretation of Cronbachs Alpha Value 37

Table 3.3: Cronbachs Alpha for Pilot Test 38

Table 4.1: Responses Rate 40

Table 4.2: Respondents Profile 41

Table 4.3: Reliability Analysis 43

Table 4.4: Descriptive Statistics of the Dependent and Independent Variables 44


12/94

x

Table 4.5: Inter Correlations for Major Variables 46

Table 5.1: A Summary of Results of Hypotheses Testing 51

LIST OF FIGURES PAGE

Figure 2.1: Workplace Violence Model Framework 26


13/94

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Historically, managers did not give violence any attention and they consider it

as a personal matter. Their excuse was that any problem happen with the employee is

not their problem, or it is too risky to handle it, or it is hard to identify the victim.

However, nowadays, managers begin to give the subject more and more attention.

They knew that violence have its effects on the employees and on the organization as

a whole, and it will cost too much by ignoring. Broadly defined, workplace violence

includes physical assault, threatening behavior and verbal abuse (Whitmore &

Kleiner, 1999).

Violence at workplace reveals abroad interest in issues surrounding violence at

work. However, workplace violence is not merely an episodic problem created by

deranged persons, but it is highly complex issue, rooted in wider social, economic,

organizational and cultural factors. Violence at work is increasingly becoming a cause

for concern within the organizations.

Workplace violence can strike anywhere, and no one is immune. Some

workers, however, are at increased risk. Among them are workers who exchange

money with the public; deliver passengers, goods, or services; or work alone or in

small groups, during late night or early morning hours, in high-crime areas, or in

community settings and homes where they have extensive contact with the public.


14/94

2

Violence at workplace does not come from nothing, it generates from small incidents

that happened. Violence in the workplace not only affects the victims, but also co-

workers who may feel angry, fearful, stressed, and depressed as a result. Workplace

violence is sometimes caused by a laid-off employee, an estranged spouse, or a

stressed-out worker (Johnson, Lewis, & Gardner, 1995).

Violence can be generated from inside the organization or from the outside.

Often it occurs because of the surrounding environment. It can occur inside or outside

the workplace and can range from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults and

homicide, one of the leading causes of job-related deaths. On 31 March 1986 at the

California State Employment Development Department in Garden Grove, California,

an employee who was upset with his supervisor and wanted a transfer shot and killed

the supervisor and then himself (Johnson, Lewis, & Gardner, 1995).

Violence has many faces, some of which are far more covert than actual

physical assault and encompasses sexual harassment, bullying and carefully veiled

intimidation and isolation (Corney, 2008). Workplace violence continues to be

considered a prevalent problem for organizations. Its effects include lowered

productivity, increased employee stress and absenteeism (Corney, 2008), lawsuits,

increased insurance premiums, tarnished reputations (e.g., Atkinson, 2000), reduced

customer satisfaction (Walkup, 1999), and costly property damage. Business is

frequently a battlefield, with employees waging war against each other.

According to McCune (1999), three people are murdered in the workplace

every day in the USA, while an estimated 1 million workers 18,000 a week are


15/94

3

assaulted each year. In addition to the direct costs (medical and legal) of workplace

violence, related costs also include a decline in company morale and consequent loss

of productivity, increased absenteeism, higher employee turnover, and damage to a

companys credibility and reputation (Carll, 1999).

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Apparently, workplace violence has caused increment of unnecessary

expenditure in organization such as lower productivity, higher absenteeism and

turnover, higher insurance cost and lawsuits. With the current global economics

falling, management is zooming into organization effectiveness and minimizing the

operating cost in order to stay competitive in the market. Besides that, employees are

expecting the employer to provide a safe working environment for them. Those

companies that meeting employees expectation will be a focus for the talents and

become an employer of choice.

The occurrence of workplace violence is not usual; to be more specific those

who are working in the public sector are much more exposed to the violence. Staff in

these occupations frequently deal with the public under stressful circumstances and

often consider violence as an inevitable part of their jobs (McGrath & Goulding,

1996). This research is intended to examine the relationship between management

style, working environment and co-workers relationship on workplace violence in

University Utara Malaysia (UUM) and how these factors has the impact on

employees.


16/94

4

Many researchers have done among different countries to find out which

factors could contribute to more violence inside the organizations. Factors like stress,

working environment, organizational structure, co-worker relationshipetc.

(Johnson, Lewis, & Gardner, 1995). Accordingly, this research examines the impact

of the organizational structure and supervisor interactions, environmental working

conditions, and co-workers relationships in organization. People perceive behavior

differently, so what one employee sees as threatening, another will describe as merely

annoying. The causes of violence also vary enormously from one situation to another.

In other words, to examine the relationship between the factors and the workplace

violence (McGrath & Goulding, 1996).

The working environment, the nature of the employees relationship, and the

structure of the organization can all generate any type of workplace violence.Workplace violence is not only a crisis that can be classified as a strictly localized

only in our country. Rather, violence in the workplace is a global problem that

transcends the boundaries of a particular country, work setting, or occupational group

(Chappell and DiMartino, 1998).

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This research was conducted to find the relationship of the independent

variables, which are working environment, organizational structure, and co-workers

relationships with the dependent variable, which is the arise of violence in the

workplace. This research intends to answer the following questions:


17/94

5

1) Is there any relationship between working environment conditions and theextent of workplace violence in UUM

2) Is there any relationship between management style and the extent ofworkplace violence in UUM

3) Is there any relationship between co-workers relationships and the extent ofworkplace violence in UUM

1.4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The main objective of the study is to examine which among variables

contributes to workplace violence and which attributes drive management toward

decrease the violence level in the organization. Specifically, the objectives of this

study are listed below:

To examine whether working environment conditions affects the extent ofworkplace violence in UUM.

To examine whether management style affects the extent of workplaceviolence in UUM.

To examine whether co-workers relationships affects the extent of workplaceviolence in UUM.

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The significance of this study can contribute many advantages to many parties

such as corporations, regulators, policy makers, and the analytical and empirical


18/94

6

researches. This research can open the eye of the managers pertaining to this subject.

Although there are many studies have been conducted pertaining to this subject on the

factors that can contribute to the violence in workplace. According to Johnson, Lewis,

& Gardner (1995), workplace violence is sometimes caused by a laid-off employee,

an estranged spouse, or a stressed-out worker. However, this study will be more

detailed on certain factors that could contribute to workplace violence. Moreover,

further studies done by researchers found that uncertainty and fear caused by

organizational change led to more aggressive acts of violence such as intimidation,

humiliation and bullying of employees by managers, ultimately leading to the end of

participants careers (Bryant & Cox, 2003).

This study will improve the management understanding on which factors that

could affect the workplace violence, increase their information above this area via

providing additional evidence on workplace violence, and ultimately attempting to

prevent the workplace violence in the organization. Historically managers tried to

avoid dealing with these kinds of issues, however, this study aimed to provide the

management a comprehensive view on workplace violence and views workplace

violence as a workplace issue that warrants serious attention.

It will also give the employees a better view of how workplace violence can

happen and hence minimizing the level of their involvement.

Furthermore, this study can provide the organization an awareness about the

factors that can be the cause for workplace violence in the organization in its all types

whether it were physically, mentality, verballyetc. such as working environment,


19/94

7

co-workers relationships, and management style. Hence, taking into a preventive

action on how to minimize the workplace violence effectively to achieve the

organization effectiveness as a whole such as increasing productivity, lower the

attrition and absenteeism and reduce the stress level among its employees. Not to

forget, the awareness of this issue can save the organization from any legal liability,

because violence can cause suffering, disability and even death.

As well benefited UUM as an established institution, the researcher also hopes

that this study will give a very big impact to UUM employees on the awareness of

workplace violence and also can be useful for them to understand the approaches to

be taken in order to prevent them from this subject matter. This knowledge is

hopefully would be useful as a source of information for the future research regarding

this issue and personally be exposed to the research working environment, develop a

research skill and also getting information direct from the public.

Finally, it also can add to the existing literature on workplace violence and can

be used as one of the references or guidance for future research as well as enriching

the literature in human and social development.

1.6 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS

1.6.1 Workplace Violence

Workplace violence is any physical assault, threatening behavior and

verbal abuse that occurs in the workplace or whiles the victim is in the

workplace or on duty.


20/94

8

1.6.2 Management Style

The general manner, outlook, attitude, and behavior of a manager in his

or her dealings with subordinates. Organizations may have, or seek to have,

distinctive management styles, and sometimes train employees to try to ensure

that a preferred style, fitting in with the desired corporate culture, is always

used. Management styles can vary widely between extremes of control and

consultation.

1.6.3 Working Environment

The work environment is comprised of the physical location,

equipment, materials processed or used, and the activities of an employee

while engaged in the performance of his work. There are no stated exclusions

of place or circumstance.

1.6.4 Co-Worker Relationships

These are the daily interactions necessary for conducting business and

involve the necessity of co-workers to interact, understand and share in

transaction.

1.7 CONCLUSION

This chapter has presented the background of the study as an introduction.

This chapter also describes the problem statements, research questions, research

objectives and the significance of the study.


21/94

9

CHAPTER 2

LITRETURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Workplace violence has been on a steady increase over the past decade. Nearly

every form of media has carried stories of violence in the workplace. Numerous

studies and reports show the amount of violence and conflict in the workplace has

dramatically increased in recent years. According to one study, the rate of workplace

homicide has tripled in the last decade (Whitmore & Kleiner, 1999).

Right now a majority of working adults have either witnessed, personally

experienced, or seen in the media numerous violent acts in the a workplace setting.

Just as the term ofcarjacking did not exist nine or ten years ago, similarly workplace

violence is now too familiar to us (Carll, 1999).

There are many incidents that happen within the organizations but never been

exposed, because most of the organizations trying to put so much effort in order to

keep these incidents away from the media and the people. In another way they do not

want their image to be ruined in the community.

Since the definition of what exactly the workplace is can be problematic, being

able to draw significant correlations between violence, behavior, and other

occupational-related independent variables is extremely difficult.


22/94

10

Historically, workplace violence was narrowly defined to include only

physical assault or homicide that occurred at the workplace. Nevertheless, this has

been expanded by researchers, campaigners, and official bodies to embrace a much

wider spectrum of disagreeable interpersonal experience that has had the effect of

greatly inflating the apparent incidence of violence.

So, to understand the true meaning of violence at workplace, we should

understand what we mean by violence and what do we mean by workplace. Violence

can be defined as Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or

abusing: crimes of violence. Its the use of physical force against persons that

potentially causes fear, injury or death. Damage, in some contexts, is also considered

a form of violence.

The definition of violence is often widened to include threats of physical force

and substantially abusive language and harassing actions. Bulatao and VandenBos

(1996) attempt to define workplace as follows: workplace violence appears to be to

refer to crimes of violence that occur in the workplace or while the victim is at work

or on duty. Violence today is not confined to bad areas. It touches all communities.

Violence can come from outside an organization or have its origin within an

organization. External violence is perpetrated by people outside the organization and

maybe aimed at individual staff or directed at the organization itself. Internal violence

organization is on culture of aggression (Bulatao & VandenBos 1996).

Some situations of violence that occur inside and outside the workplace are

stated in the following table (Bulatao & VandenBos 1996).


23/94

11

Table 2.1: Situations of violence that occur inside and outside the workplace

Inside the workplace Outside the workplace

Internal worker; external assailant

unknown, e.g. Petrol station attendant

robbed by an unknown gunman

External worker; external assailant unknown,e.g. Mobile security guard confronted by an

intender

Internal worker; external assailant known,e.g. Social security officer assaulted by an

angry client

External worker; external assailant known,e.g. Manager stalked and attacked by a

retrenched worker outside the office

Internal worker; internal assailant unknown,

e.g. Psychiatric nurse attacked by new

admission

External worker; internal assailant unknown,

e.g. Police officer confronted in a domestic

violence situation

Internal worker; external assailant known,e.g. Worker sexually harassed by a

colleague

External worker; internal assailant known,e.g. Mental health worker on home visit to an

aggressive patient

So what is violence at workplace? Many researchers defined violence at

workplace as a purposeful or reactive behavior, which produces damaging or hurtful

effects, physically or emotionally, on people (Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002). Whitmore

& Kleiner (1999) said that workplace violence includes physical assault, threatening

behavior and verbal abuse.

Violence can be defined as Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating,

damaging, or abusing: crimes of violence. It is the use of physical force against

persons that potentially causes fear, injury or death. Damage, in some contexts, is also

considered a form of violence. The definition of violence is often widened to include

threats of physical force and substantially abusive language and harassing actions.

2.1.1 Types of workplace violence

There are four types of violence, can be listed as follows:

1) Intrusive violence: it a violence that occurs in the workplaceby an outsider who has no legitimate relationship to the

workplace such as terrorists acts, criminal intent by


24/94

12

strangers, drug related aggression, robberies, and protesting

in a violent way against the organization policies and

practices.

2) Consumer related violence: this type of violence is widelyknown and recognized. It involves violence practices and

acts by consumer/clients/patients (and family) violence

against staff. Another type of consumer related violence is

called vicarious trauma, which mean according to Gill,

Fisher, & Bowie (2002), workers or employees who were

displaying signs of traumatization (psychological shock) -

as a result of dealing with violent client. In addition, not

forget the result of having the vice versa violence, an act

from the staff towards the consumer/clients, or patients.

3) Relationship violence: this relationship violence involvesbullying and harassment from the staff themselves on other

ones. This one can also involve any aggressive acts from

former employees with an employment-based relationship

with the organization. This kind could include a former

spouse, a family member, or any another significant. The

last is what called a domestic violence, violence that happen

between two who have a relationship.


25/94

13

4) Organizational violence: this can occur in many ways, oneof the types is organizational violence against the staff.

Laying off employee without a proper reason could be the

trigger for violence to occur. A rapid and ruthless change in

the organizational could put the employees under the

pressure, which will be the trigger for such incidents and

violent acts. Those staff who is themselves poorly trained,

under pressure and stress due to the organizational acts, can

make a perfect environment for an external assailant to gain

access to capitalize on known weakness from the

organization security. Which will hurt the consumers and

other customers that want the service from the organization.

An organization due to a change may provide a climate that

can assault itself and other customers as well (Gill, Fisher,

& Bowie, 2002).

2.2 CASUAL FACTORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE

There are many aspects that contribute to the workplace violence; one of these

is that the company hired the potential aggressor and that the victims of the offence

are co-workers exposed to the potential wrath on a daily basis. As we stated earlier,

violence does not come from nothing, it appears from small incidents that occur in the

workplace.


26/94

14

Co-workers relationships, management style, and working environment are

factors of workplace violence that can arise the violence in the workplace.

2.2.1 Social learning theory

Social learning theory (imitation of behavior derived from social

interactions) has been linked to a variety of settings and a variety of human

behaviors. In these studies, it was found that four elements associated with

social learning theory were supported and may be related to workplace

violence in one or two ways (Alexander & Langford, 1992). The fist is internal

to the organization, where social learning may be associated with the culture

or environment of the organization.

The other is external, where the subject is influenced through family,

society and other environments outside the organization. In both instances, the

four major components of social learning and differential association (learnt

behaviors from deviant social groups) are present: imitations of admired

models, individual definition regarding deviant behavior, extent of differential

association and the extent of differential reinforcement (Akers, 1973).

Whether it is inside or outside the workplace, possible aggressors start

the violence for the acceptance or the rewards through their awareness of what

they see as acceptable or rewarded behavior (Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002).


27/94

15

If aggressiveness -permeates much of the workplace- then, it seems

likely that only members of the work group may begin to assimilate such

behavior. In a similar way, they may bring some of their negative behaviors to

the workplace from their personal life society. Differentials associations in and

of itself is not negative. Differential association means that a person may join a

group that it is in control of the majority of a desired individual reinforces.

These reinforces are mainly peer acceptance, power, security and nurturing

(Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002).

Frustration is believed to derive from unsatisfied feelings of

incongruence and/or contradiction with ones environment, whether that is at

home or at work (Holland, 1973).

Studies focusing on the relationship between frustration and violence

have suggested strong relationships between frustration and aggressive

behavior. Frustrations cultivated on the job, at home, within relationships and

other environment may influence a person to be violent (Rich & Woods 1985).

In meaning, frustrated workers may respond violently to a variety of

stress factors, such as social factors, economic factors, and management

related factors.


28/94

16

2.2.2 Working Environment

Working environment is characterized by an authoritarian management

style and changeable/ unpredictable supervision; an atmosphere where the

work and dignity of employees are undervalued; and, an environment that

includes frequent invasions of privacy, a high degree of secrecy, more

demands, and less support (Johnson, 1994).

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, during the

year that ended July 1993, recorded more than 1,000 murders, six million

threats and more than two million workers physically attacked while on the

job (Van Aalten, 1994).

Authoritarian workplaces, which include those where employees have

little say in how they do their jobs or environments where managers bully

employees, tend to have higher rates of on the- job violence (Johnson &

Indvik, 1996). Some researchers have suggested that authoritarian

management styles and strict job performance standards which give employees

little control over their work were factors in several workplace shootings that

occurred in the last few years (Travnick, 1994).

The working environment may be an important factor in influencing

the types of workplace violence experienced within the organization. It could

be posited that an active management culture could be part of minimizing the

impact of internal and external violence upon organizations.


29/94

17

The physical condition of the facility, exposure to toxic waste, polluted

air and water or merely less than clean conditions have been found to

influence such negative attitudes and behaviors in the workplace (Bower,

1992; Altman, 1993).

In dictatorial workplaces, that includes those employees who does have

the right to make an opinion or in an environment where those who have been

bullied by managers, be likely to have a higher rates of workplace violence.

According to Johnson & Indvik (1996), there have been some cases

where certain risk factors observed in individuals were exacerbated by an

overlay of destructive supervision that engendered in violence. Thus, this

considered as a toxic work environments for employees (Johnson et al., 1994).

A toxic work environment is characterized by an authoritarian

management style and changeable/ unpredictable supervision; an atmosphere

where the work and dignity of employees are undervalued; and, an

environment that includes frequent invasions of privacy, a high degree of

secrecy, more demands, and less support (Johnson, 1994).

A toxic workplace is usually highly stressed, understaffed and run in

an authoritative, disciplined style with lots of labor-management disputes and

a high rate of worker compensation claims. It is an environment where people

feel management does not listen (Roan, 1994).


30/94

18

Society expects companies to provide a safe working environment and

that includes safety from violent acts. Therefore, episodes of violence have the

potential to result in lawsuits against both the company and individual

employees, particularly those with supervisory authority (Johnson & Gardner,

1999).

Current economic conditions, with an abundance of acquisitions,

divestitures, layoffs, and major departmental reorganizations, can be very

stressful for both the individuals and the organizations affected (Lind, and

Otte, 1994). Meaning that, these issues can put the organization in a situation

that can push the employee to the edge. Eventually incident might occur, and

violence is on the door.

The likelihood of liability decreases when preventive measures and

early interventions are taken to avoid or defuse potentially deadly situations

(Zachary, 1998).

A troubled work environment can also lead to incidents of workplace

violence. It is the employer who must assume responsibility for the violence

and stress that arises within the workplace (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997).

According to Kinney and Johnson (1993), the characteristics of a

troubled work environment can consists of chronic labor/management

disputes, frequent grievances filed by employees, extraordinary numbers of


31/94

19

injury claims; especially psychological injuries, understaffing or excessive

demands for overtime, many stressed workers, and authoritarian management.

In talking about the working environment, we should not forget the

effect of a diverse workplace on the employees. According to (Johnson, Lewis,

& Gardner, 1995), a diverse workplace can create a great deal of tension in the

workplace, and if diversity is not handled properly, it can lead to explosive

situations.

The differences in the characteristics, culture, and misunderstanding

with regard to language, inappropriate gesture, and cultural norms in the

diverse environment can and had led to violence.

2.2.3 Management Style

Interactions between management and employees are important factors

relating to workplace violence (Bacharach, 1998). Management style and/or

leadership abilities play a major role in employees opinions and attitudes

towards companies and their members. A managers style of leadership has

often been found to be incongruent with the employees perception of that

style (Minor & Henry, 1995).

This misalignment and miscommunication of intentions can cause

mistrust, confusion and resentment (Leo, 1995). In addition, managers are

often called upon to direct people to perform unpleasant or disagreeable tasks.


32/94

20

These may include administering discipline or even withholding employee

benefits. These wok environment transactions certainly increase tensions. A

manager who is adept at communicating and skilled in interpersonal relations

may minimize or divert aggressive behaviors from employees.

Management-employee communication problems are overwhelmingly

at the root of workplace violence incidents. Employees may also be upset with

their managers over work assignments, the way they are treated in general, or

the way they are talked to. Also, employees kill because they are not promoted

(Johnson & Indvik, 1996).

Some researchers have suggested that authoritarian management styles

and strict job performance standards which give employees little control over

their work were factors in several workplace shootings that occurred in the last

few years (Travnick, 1994).

Employees are less likely to be disgruntled when employers keep them

apprised of developments that may affect their livelihoods such as layoffs.

Employers should announce these decisions early and arrange for

outplacement services and counselling for laid-off employees (Stewart &

Kleiner, 1997).

Management style and organizational structure can influence levels of

the violence from inside the organization as the origins may lie in bad

management rather than malicious intent. A highly competitive business


33/94

21

environment can elevate stress levels and increase the potential for violence.

Quasi-military hierarchical and rigid management styles, and marked

supervisor/employee divisions, exacerbate a them and us culture, foster

resentment and anger and also increase the probability of violence.

High-risk scenarios include management toleration of bullying, job

insecurity, workers facing unemployment with little chance of re-employment,

workers with a strong sense of entitlement who feel cheated, unforgiving

workers, a loss of self-esteem and stability amongst workers and disciplinary

suspensions.

2.2.4 Co-workers relationships

Violence arises at work because the workplace is where their abusers

can most easily find the targeted victims. Therefore, the workplace becomes a

potentially dangerous place not only for those victims but for their co-workers

as well (Johnson & Gardner, 1999). A New York Victims Service agency

study finds that 74 percent of abusers make threatening calls or visits to their

victims' workplace. When that happens, co-workers are drawn into potentially

life-threatening situations (Popham, 1998).

Another source of agitation is inter-employee relationships. These are

the daily interactions necessary for conducting and involve the necessity of co-

workers to interact, understand and share in transactions.


34/94

22

Personality styles, conflicts, ethnic, racial or gender biases, along with

differences in personal work habits, may combine to cause aggravations

among co-workers. People, who operate from a need to control relationships,

or those who suffer from self-esteem problems, often tend to develop

dysfunctional views of working relationships (Ford & Linney, 1995). Co-

worker relationships tend to become confused in the workplace (Woititz,

1987).

These are different from close interpersonal relationships that may

develop between employees. Unwelcome interpersonal relationships or

attractions can enhance the emotional context of work relationships and can be

negative in nature. Romantic obsessions with other employees have been cited

as significant motives for violence in the workplace (Barnett & Martinez,

1995).

The difficulty with these obsessions is that when they occur in a private

or social setting. In the workplace however, many workers can be helpless in

removing themselves from the proximity of the stalker (Dietz, 1995).

Nevertheless, co-workers who feel they have been wrongly targeted for

termination, passed over for a promotion, rejected romantically, or denied a

fair wage increase can be candidates to commit violent retaliation (Ramsey,

1994). At Kraft General Foods in Illinois, early 1994, a male employee shot

and killed a female co-worker at one of the companys plants. The victim

recently had broken off a relationship with her killer (Anfuso, 1994).

Good relationships with colleagues are crucial. Open discussion is

essential to encourage positive relationships. A good relationship with the


35/94

23

workers will lead to more calm environment and healthy one, which will give

the workers the secure that can make him more productive and a high

motivated one.

2.3 PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE AT WORKPLACE

Studies indicate that the tactics taken most often by employers doing nothing

or simply hiring extra security personnel are inadequate (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997).

So employers have to put some measures in order to prevent or to reduce workplace

violence. The prevention program should include a publicized policy statement that

violent or abusive behavior towards staff will not be tolerated. It should also have

written policies, education and training programs for staff and incident reporting

systems (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997).

Other scholars like (Whitmore & Kleiner, 1999), suggests that employers can

take several measures to prevent workplace violence, beginning at the hiring stage

and continuing through out employment to the point of termination. We can summrize

prevention steps as follow:

Support from senior managementThe support from the top management and opening more

communication channels with the employees can prevent the occurrence of

workplace violence. When the leaders are aware of what is happening in the

organization and opening their ears for the incidents that happen, employees

will be more awareness and will report any incident that might occur. While


36/94

24

absence of visible, tangible support from the highest levels, even the most well

designed program will fail to produce the necessary level of change and

security.

The TeamForming a management team to develop, review and implement

policies dealing with the workplace violence. The team should include senior

management, human resources personal, a mental health consultant who is

expert in workplace violence, legal counsel, security, and any other related

personal (Carll, 1999).

Policies and proceduresEvery company should have in place a policy that says that any

statement that is thought to be threatening; is made in the presence of any

employee; and concerns the company, a contractor, another employee or the

person himself or herself should be reported confidentially to the human

resources or security department (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997). It should be clear

that the creation of any effective policy depends on the support from the top

and the team.

TrainingThe purpose of the training is to ensure the implementation of the

policy and procedures that support it. Its purpose is not, as some assume, to

impart the ability to predict or spot dangerousness. For a workplace violence

prevention program to be effective, employees at all organizational levels must

be equipped to provide early and reliable notification of possible signals (Gill,


37/94

25

Fisher, & Bowie, 2002). Not to forget the management has to prepare the staff

with practical security procedures and training in conflict management.

Terminations and layoffs: using common sense and planningThe return of the fired employee to exact murderous revenge has

become the symbol of the overall fear of workplace violence. On 14

November, 1991, a fired employee killed three former co-workers and

wounded six others using a rifle. He then shot himself in the head. He and one

other wounded employee died two days later (Stuart, 1992). So in order to

prevent this from happening, organizations need to plan and follow the

procedures in doing such actions.

SecurityImprove the security measures, installing new systems surveillance

system, and develop a working relationship with the police might help the

organization to prevent and block any attempt for the violence.

2.4 RESEARCH FRAME WORK

The framework depicted below is developed based on literature review and

research problems. This model focuses on the factors that may have effect on

workplace violence. The independent variables are the predictors to workplace

violence include variables such as management style, co-workers relationship, and

environmental working conditions. Workplace violence is the dependant variable.


38/94

26

Research framework consist two variables namely dependent variables and

independent variables. Considering all factors of the independents and dependent

variables, the model of the study is depicted the following figure.

Independent Variable Dependent

Variable

Figure 2.1: Workplace Violence Model Framework

Management

Style

Working

Environment

Co-workers

RelationshipWorkplace

Violence


39/94

27

2.5 JUSTIFICATION OF HYPOTHESES

This study consists of three hypotheses, they are:

2.5.1 HYPOTHESIS 1

This hypothesis is to study whether the findings of previous

studies that have been done on workplace violence in other countries,

and shows that co-worker relationships have an impact in contributing

the violence in the workplace, as in UUM.

H0: There is no significance relationship between co-workers

relationship and workplace violence.

HA: There is significance relationship between co-workers

relationship and workplace violence

2.5.2 HYPOTHESIS 2

This hypothesis has been put to see whether there is any

relationship between the management style and workplace violence.

This factor consider important in contributing the workplace violence

according to the other researchers.

H0: There is no significance relationship between management style

and workplace violence

HA: There is significance relationship between management style

and workplace violence


40/94

28

2.5.3 HYPOTHESIS 3

Other researchers; Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002; Bower (1992);

Altman (1993), have found that there is a relationship between working

environment and workplace violence. Thus hypothesis 3 stated that:

H0: There is no significance relationship between working

environment and workplace violence.

HA: There is significance relationship between working environment

and workplace violence.

2.6 CONCLUSION

This chapter had presented a review of literature that focused on the

relationship between working environment, co-workers relationship, and management

style and violence at workplace. The following chapter describes in the detail the

procedures and methodology that were used for data collection and analysis in this

investigation.


41/94

29

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Upon existing academic literature, several determinants explain the

relationship between violence and factors that contribute to it. Different theories such

as social learning theory used to explain those factors. This chapter will discuss on

research methodology that covers research design, research framework, the data

collection, which is primary and secondary data, and sampling techniques and

procedures used for the analysis of the data. Furthermore, these types of methodology

and design are used to find the information in order to solve the problem.

3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

A research design is a frame work or blue print for conducting the research

project. It specifies the details or the procedures necessary for obtaining the

information needed to structure and to solve research problem (Malhotra, 1999).

The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that contributed to

workplace violence. This type of research is a correlational study because involve

independent variables such as working environment, management style and

supervisor interactions, and co-worker relationship. These factors may or may not

contribute to workplace violence in University Utara Malaysia.


42/94

30

3.3 SOURCES OF DATA

Two types of data were used, namely primary data and secondary data.

3.3.1 Primary Data

Primary data is information that first obtained by the researcher on the

variables of interest for the specific purpose of study (Uma Sekaran, 2000). In

undertaking this research, researcher will distribute a set of questionnaires to

the managerial staff in UUM.

3.3.2 Secondary Data

According to Sekaran (2000), Secondary data refer to the information

gathered by someone than the researcher conducting the current study such as

company record, publication, industry analysis offered by the media, web

publications and so on. Unlike the primary data, secondary data is readily

prepared, thus not so expensive and time consuming to be obtained.

Researcher will used secondary data to get more information that support

primary data in order to accomplish the research, help research to support and

strengthen the information gained from primary data and also help researcher

to interpret primary data clearly.

For this study, researcher gathered the secondary data from UUM

website, annual reports, and other books that are related with in this field of

study as well as articles in the magazines to support the literature review and

deny the argument. The secondary data consists of both internal and external

data sources.


43/94

31

External SourcesBooks and references that related to this research

Journals and articles

Articles from internet

Internal SourcesUUM website

UUM magazines / publications

3.4 SAMPLING DESIGN

This study is correlation study that was conducted with the aim of delineating

the important variables that are associated with the problem. The field survey was

conducted through to distribution of questionnaires to targeted respondent. The

respondents are the managerial staff in UUM.

According to Hopskin (2000), the safest way to insure sample to represent the

population is to use a random selection procedures especially if the study don not

have a proportional representation of population subgroups. For the purpose of this

study, the researcher proposes to use simple random sampling because this method

provides least bias and offers the most generalizability (Sekaran, 2003). An even/odd

selection was used to choose the respondents from the data that have been collected

from the register department in UUM.


44/94

32

3.5 UNIT ANALYSIS

The unit of analyses is the managerial staff in UUM in Kedah. According to

Sekaran (2003), a 10% of the population will represent the population. 120

respondents were chosen in the sampling process.

3.6 ORGANIZATION BACKGROUND

The University Utara Malaysia was formally incorporated on 16th

February

1984, with the unique mission to provide academic excellence in the areas of business

management education, IT and quality management. Faced with this challenging

task, the University has, since its inception, ensured that its academic niche areas are

focused on such disciplines as management, accountancy, economics, information

technology, entrepreneurial development, tourism management, banking and finance,

social development, human resources development and international affairs

management.

From its humble beginnings in Tanah Merah, Jitra, in 1990, the University

moved to Sintok, 48 kilometers north of Alor Setar, the state capital of Kedah Darul

Aman and 10 kilometers east of Changlun, a small town on the North-South

Highway. The 1,061 hectares campus is surrounded by tropical rain forests set against

a background of mountains. The Sintok and Badak Rivers run through the campus

creating a truly unique feature as well as making it one of the most beautiful

campuses in Malaysia.

Source: The Official Web Site of University Utara Malaysia; www.uum.edu.my


45/94

33

3.7 DATA COLLECTION METHOD

Data will be collected using a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire

consists of 31 items. The questionnaires were distributed to 120 respondents who will

be the managerial staff in UUM, a 102-questionnaires will concluded in the analysis.

The questionnaire were adapted and modified to be suited the employees in UUM, it

was adapted and modified from Iowa Department of Human Services,

http://www.dhs.state.ia.us/; and www.workplaceviolence911.com/docs/Wpvtool.pdf,

Cheryl Anderson (2002).

3.8 MEASUREMENT

A questionnaire was used as the research instrument. The instrument was

basically to identify the factors that contribute to workplace violence in UUM. Most

of the questions used in this survey questionnaire were adapted to UUM conditions

and design, were considered suitable for managerial staff.

3.8.1 QUESTIONNAIRE

The questionnaire consists of 4 sections. Section A consists of

the questions to gather the information about the profile of the

respondent. Section B, C, D and E south to measure items that are

related to workplace violence.


46/94

34

Table 3.1: The layout of the questionnaires

Section Variables Number of

items

Scale

A

Respondent Background

Age Gender Race Working Experience Academic

Qualifications

Place of Employment

6 Multiple choices

B, C, D,

and E

(B)Working Environment 5 Five-point Likert

scale (1-Strongly

disagree, 2-Disagree,

3-Uncertain, 4-Agree

and 5-Strongly agree)

(C)Co-worker relationship 7

(D)Management style 7

(E)Violence 6

Two scales were used in this research. First is nominal scale

used in section A, Likert scale used for sections B, C, D, and E. Likert

scale is used when responses to various items that measure a variable

can be tapped on 5 points scale which can thereafter be summated

across the items.

The scale down below show the measure used in the Likert

scale designated instrument using Likert scale with score from 1 to 5

(Sekaran, 2003). Every score shown as follows:

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly agree


47/94

35

3.9 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES

There were many procedures that researcher must follow before achieving a

final result of the study. After collecting the information from the questionnaires, the

data preparation must be obtained such as checking the data for accuracy, key in the

data into the computer, and transforming and coding the data, developing and

documenting a database structure.

The questions were coded to enable for analysis using Statistical Packages for

the Social Science (SPSS) to measure relationship and differences between variables

in this research.

Next, the frequency distribution, reliability analysis (Cronbachs Alpha

Reliability Coefficient), and hypothesis testing were conducted.

3.9.1 Frequency Distribution

According to Malhorta (1999), the objective of frequency distribution

is to obtain a count of number of responses associated with different values of

one variable and to express these counts into percentage terms.

3.9.2 Reliability Analysis

This analysis is an indication for the stability and consistency with

which the instrument measures the concept and helps to access the goodness of

a measure. In the Cronbachs Alpha reliability analysis, the closer Cronbachs

Alpha is to 1.0, the higher the internal consistency reliability. (Cronbachs

Alpha; Cronbach, 1946) measures;


48/94

36

1. Reliability less than 0.6 considered poor.2. Reliability in the range 0.7 is considered to be acceptable3. Reliability more than 0.8 are considered to be good

3.9.3 Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a test that will determine whether should we accept

or reject the hypothesis. If the observation value is greater than the critical

value, then the decision rule of the hypothesis testing is to accept the

alternative hypothesis (HA)

The important role of the hypothesis is to suggest variables to be

included in the research design. The analysis of the hypothesis will be using

Pearson Correlation Coefficient.

3.9.4 Pearson Correlation Coefficient

A statistical procedure for analyzing associative relationships between

a metric dependent variable and one or more independent variables. For this

research, the relationship between violence at workplace as dependent variable

and working environment, management style and co-workers relationship, as

the independent variables were tested.

The scale model suggested by Davies (1971) used to describe the

relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable, are

as shown below:


49/94

37

(a) 0.7 and above very strong relationship,

(b) 0.50 to 0.69 strong relationship,

(c) 0.30 to 0.49 moderate relationship,

(d) 0.10 to 0.29 low relationships and

(e) 0.01 to 0.09 very low relationship.

3.10 PILOT TEST

Before the questionnaire is distributed to the actual respondents, the

questionnaire was pre-tested in order to discover its reliability and validity. The pilot

test is beneficial to this dissertation since invaluable and effectively of the

questionnaire can be obtained to improve its reliability and validity. Reliability is the

degree to which measures are free from random error and therefore yield consistent

result. The closer Cronbachs Alpha is to 1.0, the higher the internal consistency

reliability.

Table 3.2: The Range and Interpretation of Cronbachs Alpha Value

Range Interpretation

0.60 and below Poor

Within the range of 0.70 Acceptable

0.80 and above Good


50/94

38

Furthermore, the purpose of the pre-testing is to ensure the questionnaire

meets the researchers expectation in terms of information to be obtained.

Furthermore, the objective of this pre-testing actually is to identify and correct the

weaknesses of the questionnaire especially for this on design questionnaire.

In conducting the Pilot Test, 30 managerial staffs of UUM were selected

randomly as a respondent based on the convenience of time and location. The

language of the questions is thoroughly checked for its appropriateness and grammar

usage. This weaknesses and mistake then identified and being improved in actual

questionnaire to avoid errors.

The results of the reliability tests are presented in the table 3.3. The

Cronbachs alpha scores suggest accepted level of reliability of the measurement of

the variables.

Table 3.3: Cronbachs Alpha for Pilot Test

Variables Cronbachs Alpha Scores

Section B, C, D:

VIOLENCE FACTORS (IV)

(19 items)

0.780

Working environment 0.691

Management style 0.690

Co-worker relationship 0.789

Section E:

VIOLENCE AT WORKPLACE (DV)(6 items) 1 item dropped

0.677


51/94

39

3.11 CONCLUSION

This chapter discussed the research method proposed for this study. This

chapter also presents the theoretical framework and research hypothesis. Besides, it

includes the discussion of sampling design, data collection, questionnaire,

measurement and data analysis.


52/94

40

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND FINDINGS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter reports the results of data analysis. Firstly, the organizations

profile of the sample in terms of demographic profile of the respondents is described.

This is followed by the presentation of results of the analysis of independent and

dependent variables using the reliability analysis. Lastly, the results of hypothesis

testing are also presented. This study aims to achieve the research objectives as well

as answers the research questions highlighted in chapter one. In addition, this study

intends to verify the hypotheses made in chapter three.

4.2 SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS

A set of 120 questionnaires were distributed to the respondents, whom were

the managerial staff working across UUM departments. A one-week gap has been

given to respondents. The total number of questionnaires received was only 120. 18

questionnaires were incomplete. Hence, the usable questionnaires for this research

were 102. The response rate was 85% of total questionnaires distributed as shown in

Table 4.1.

Table 4.1: Responses Rate

Total %

Questionnaires distributed 120 100

Collected questionnaires 120 100

Usable questionnaires 102 85

Discarded questionnaires 18 15

Uncollected questionnaires - -


53/94

41

4.3 SAMPLE PROFILE (RESPONDENTS PROFILE)

Thesurvey demonstrated the details concerning demographic characteristics or

respondents profile as shown in Table 4.2 below.

Table 4.2: Respondents ProfileDemographic Categories %

1. Age Group Below 25 16.7

25-34 years old

35-44 years old

45-54 years old

45.1

35.3

2.9More than 55 years old 0

2. Gender Male 41.2

Female 58.8

3. Race MalayChinese

Indian

Others

87.20

10.8

2.0

4. Academic Qualification Primary 0

Secondary 47.1

Diploma 23.5

Degree 22.5

Master/PhD 6.9

5. Place Of Employment College Offices 22.5

Clinic 3.9

Uni. Departments 52.9

Others 20.6

6. Working Experience Below 2 yrs 20.6

2-4 yrs 13.7

5-7 yrs 30.4

8-10 yrs 6.9

More than 10 yrs 28.4

As to the age of the 102 respondents, the majority of the respondents were in

the category of 25 to 34 years (45.1%) followed by the age category of 35 to 44 years

(35.3%), coming to the aged below 25 years old (16.7%), and lastly respondents aged


54/94

42

from 45-55 years old (2.9%). The study indicates that majority of the respondents are

female (58.8%) while the remaining are male (41.2%).

Out of the 102 respondents, the majority of respondents were Malay

people, representing the highest race (87.2%). Followed by the Indians (10.8%), while

the rest were under category of Others with (2.0%). As for the academic qualification,

47.1% of the respondents are Secondary holders, followed by the Diploma holders

(23.5%). (22.5%) of the respondents are Degree holders, and only (6.9%) of the

respondents having a Master/PhD.

The study shows that highest number of respondents was working in Uni.

Departments (52.9%). Followed by the category of College Offices (22.5%). (20.6%)

of the respondents were under the category of Others and lastly (3.9%) of the

respondents were working in a Clinic. As for the working experience, the majority of

respondents were in the category of 5 to 7 years (30.4%), followed by the working

experience category of more than 10 years (28.4%). Thirdly, respondents with below

than 2 years experience (20.6%). Followed by respondents with 2 to 4 years

experience (13.7%). Lastly, (6.9%) of the respondents with 8 to 10 years work

experience.

4.4 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

This study uses Cronbach Alpha to test the reliability of the instruments used.

Hence, ensures consistent measurement across time and across the various items in

the instrument.


55/94

43

Reliabilities less than 0.6 are generally considered poor, while those in the

range of 0.7 are accepted reliabilities and those over 0.8 considered good. Reliability

analysis being analyzed according to the independent variables, which consists

working environment, management style, and co-workers relationships while the

dependent variable is workplace violence.

Table 4.3: Reliability Analysis

Variables No. of Items Reliability Alpha

1. Dependent Variable

Workplace Violence 6 0.688

2. Independent Variables

Working Environment 5 0.754

Management Style 7 0.776

Co-Worker Relationship 7 0.761

As shown in table 4.3, the researcher gathered an alpha value 0.754 for the

first independent variable, which is working environment. It means that all five (5)

questions asked to the respondents about the working environment, can considered

having a high reliability value. The second independent variable, management style,

the researcher gained an alpha value of 0.776, meaning that all seven (7) questions

asked about the management style can considered having a high reliability value. For

the last independent variable, co-worker relationship, the researcher found an alpha

value of 0.761. That means, all of seven asked to the respondents about the co-worker

relationship, can considered having a high reliability value. Lastly, for the dependent

variable, violence at workplace, there are six (6) questions that being asked to the

respondents. The alpha value that has being obtained from the analysis is 0.725 with

one item dropped. The overall alpha values were considered as acceptable.


56/94

44

4.5 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

In order to describe the responses for the major variables under study,

descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation on the dependent and the

independent variables were obtained. The following Table 4.4 shows the results of the

analysis.

Table 4.4: Descriptive Statistics of the Dependent and Independent Variables

Variable Mean Standard Deviation

Workplace Violence 3.230 0.7494

Co-worker Relationship 3.6275 0.64491

Management Style 3.6036 0.66488

Working Environment 3.4529 0.79200

From the results of the above Table, it can been seen that the means of all

variables fall between 3.230 and 3.627. This indicates that there were no extreme

values for the mean.

4.6 RESTATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS

Hypothesis is a statement that the researcher sets out to accept or reject based

on the data collected method. Below are the hypotheses that the researcher used in the

analysis.


57/94

45

HYPOTHESIS 1

H0: There is no significance relationship between co-workers relationship

and workplace violence.

HA: There is significance relationship between co-workers relationship and

workplace violence

HYPOTHESIS 2

H0: There is no significance relationship between management style and

workplace violence

HA: There is significance relationship between management style and

workplace violence

HYPOTHESIS 3

H0: There is no significance relationship between working environment and

workplace violence.

HA: There is significance relationship between working environment and

workplace violence.

4.7 TEST OF HYPOTHESES

To test all the hypotheses under the study, the researcher used correlation

analysis method. In this research, the researcher used Pearson Correlation Method

since this method is suitable to use when the two variables is in an interval scale.

Notice that all variables used in this research are in interval scale. The Pearson

product moment correlation was used in order to assess and understand the direction


58/94

46

and significance of the relationships of the variables used. The results are shown in

table 4.5.

Table 4.5: Inter Correlations for Major Variables

Workplac

e Violence

Working

Environment

Management

Style

Co-worker

Relationship

Workplace

Violence

- .325**

-.131 .137

Working

Environment

- -.124 .470**

Management

Style

- -.185

Co-worker

Relationship

-

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The results in the above Table shows clearly that the correlation between the

violence at workplace (dependent variable) and co-worker relationship (independent

variable) is Pearson Correlation (r) = 0.137 with p-value = 0.137

The correlation is positive and still can be accepted in the relationship between

the two variables, as the Pearson Correlation is less than 0.5 coefficients. In this

method, the significant level is at 0.01.

This also indicates that there is a positive relationship but not significant

between workplace violence and co-worker relationship.

The Pearson Correlation coefficient is 0.137, indicates that when reliability

increase about 100% workplace violence will increase 13.7%.


59/94

47

Table 4.5 shows that the correlation between the workplace violence

(dependent variable) and management style (independent variable) is Pearson

Correlation (r) = -0.131 with p-value = 0.188

The correlation is negative and cannot be accepted in the relationship between

the two variables, as the Pearson Correlation is less than 0.5 coefficients. In this

method, the significant level is at 0.01.

The probability of making mistakes is only 1%, and the level of confidence is

99%. The p level is more than 0.01, at the level of significance of 0.01.

This also indicates that there is no positive significant relationship between

workplace violence and management style.

The Pearson Correlation coefficient is -0.131, indicates that when reliability

increase about 100% workplace violence will decrease 13.1%.

In Table 4.5, the results shows clearly that the correlation between the

workplace violence (dependent variable) and working environment (independent

variable) is Pearson Correlation (r) = 0.325 with p-value = 0.001

The correlation is positive and can be accepted in the relationship between the

two variables, as the Pearson Correlation is less than 0.5 coefficients. In this method,

the significant level is at 0.01.

The probability of making mistakes is only 1%, and the level of confidence is

99%. The p level is more than 0.01, at the level of significance of 0.01.


60/94

48

This also indicates that there is a positive significant relationship between

workplace violence and co-worker relationship. The Pearson Correlation coefficient is

0.325, indicates that when reliability increase about 100% workplace violence will

increase 32.5%. thus hypothesis three is accepted.

4.8 CONCLUSION

From the above findings, correlation analysis concludes that only working

environment is considered having a positive significant relationship and correlated to

workplace violence.


61/94


62/94

50

5.2 RECAPITULATION OF THE STUDY

The purpose of the study is to examine is there any relationship between the

factors of workplace violence and the workplace violence in the UUM. This research

study three independent factors, which were, working environment, c-worker

relationship, and management style and their contribution to workplace violence. The

main objective of the study is to examine which among variables contributes to

workplace violence. Specifically, the objectives of this study are listed below:

To examine whether level of environmental working conditions affects theextent of workplace violence in UUM.

To examine whether level of management style affects the extent of workplaceviolence in UUM.

To examine whether level of situation of co-workers relationships affects theextent of workplace violence in UUM.

Three main hypotheses were developed to explore the relationship between these

factors and workplace violence:

a) There is significant relationship between co-workers relationship andworkplace violence

b) There is significant relationship between management style and workplaceviolence


63/94

51

c) There is significant relationship between working environment and workplaceviolence.

From this research, the major significant findings from the three main

hypotheses are presented in Table 5.1 below.

Table 5.1: A Summary of Results of Hypotheses Testing

Hypothesis Results

H1There is significant relationship between co-workersrelationship and workplace violence

Rejected

H2There is significant relationship between managementstyle and workplace violence Rejected

H3There is significant relationship between working

environment and workplace violence.Accepted

5.3 DISCUSSION

Although there are many factors that can contribute to the occurrence of

workplace violence, such as stress, organizational structure, interpersonal issues...etc.

the researcher only choose three factors to study in the UUM contexts to see whether

these factors have their impact on the workplace and the employees that could result

in the end with violent incident or not. The researcher wants to test if there is a any

relationship between these three factors namely, working environment, management

style, and co-workers relationship and the workplace violence in the UUM.

The result of this study shows that there is a positive significance relationship

between one of the variables that is working environment and workplace violence. On


64/94

52

the other hand, a positive but not significant relationship occurs between co-worker

relationship and workplace violence. Whereas for the last variable, management style,

the results has shown a negative relationship between the factor and the workplace

violence. It very clear from the results that workplace violence is mainly affected by

the working environment, that means workplace violence could occur in the

organization, and other factors does not have that significant influence which could

contribute to workplace violence. Below are some discussion for each research

questions.

5.3.1 Research question one

The results exhibited in table 4.5 shows that there is positive

correlations between working environment and workplace violence. That

means, working environment is a primary factor that can contribute to

workplace violence in UUM. The results show that there is a great possibility

of violence might occur. Therefore, UUM management must look into it more

deeply and discover what are the factors that can make the working

environment such a violence factor.

As previously illustrated in the literature and based on the findings

from other researchers, it was found that workplace environment have a great

effect on the employees productivity, performance, and morality, not

forgetting their psychological stage. In other words, from a logical standpoint,

it makes sense that a workplace psychosocial environment that either

accommodates or tolerates behavioral problems would also be deficient in


65/94

53

quality practices (Bennett & Lehman, 1999). For example, increased customer

sensitivity requires traits and behaviors such as reliability, responsiveness and

trustworthiness (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry, 1988), work behaviors

that are negatively associated with drug or alcohol abuse (Lehman & Simpson,

1992).

Even thought specialization in a particular job scope has been proven

that could bring higher productivity. However, limitation an employee job

scope in a particular area could make the particular employee feel bored and

eventually stress with his / her job. In a stressful working environment,

employee tends to act and behave out the norms. Hence, management should

consider the implications of job routines and consider enhancing the employee

work life with job enrichment such as temporary job rotation among employee

in the department.

By the new work station set up, new faces, and the new challenges in

job rotation will provide employee a brand new feeling in work. Fresh,

excitements from the job rotation will make an employee becoming engaged

with his organization and motivated to work. It is a well-known fact that with

the pleasant working mood, employee will perform greater productivity,

greater creativity and reduction in work stress. In additional, from the

strategically point of view, job rotation will also enhance understanding

among colleagues on their peers job daily function. This understanding is

essential for the team to work together as it built a solid based among the

colleague to have a common ground that could enhance the communication

between peers.


66/94

54

Besides that, organization could also consider to have a plan for the

employee recreational activities such as providing some in house sports

facilities for the employee to release their stress while working. This strategy

has been long employed by some giant multinational companies such as

Agilent Inc and Google Inc. whereby the company provides sport facility in

the plant such as squash court, tennis court which employees can be stay away

from their job and release their stress by playing during working hours. Some

conservative management will raise the questions on such arrangement if this

plan will affect the employee productivity.

However, the researcher believe that in the modern management era,

management should practice a difference perception which putting more trust

to its employees and believe employees could perform better in democratic

policy. Furthermore with the increase of Z generation employees involving in

workplace, management has to learn to adapt to the new management style to

deal with the change of the population in organization.

Apart from that, management should also consider to open up more

channels of communication to allow its employees to express their opinions /

thought in a way to reduce the stress in workplace. Open communication could

enhance the employee working experience and also an essential factor in

employee work satisfactions. Open communication can be implemented by

reducing the layers in upward communication, frequent meeting session that

allowing employees to express themselves openly, and so on. Also not

forgetting some outdoor activities such as team building, potluck picnic which

in informal setting which also leads to more relax mood and make the

communication upward, downwards happens freely.


67/94

55

5.3.2 Research question two

The results exhibited in table 4.5 shows that there is no correlations

between management style and workplace violence. That means that

management style does not have the impact on the workplace violence in

UUM.

The negative correlation between management style and workplace

violence in UUM does not mean that UUM management can simply ignore the

weight of this factor. One the other hand, UUM management should be aware

and be prepared for influence of this variable by taking some proactive

approaches to avoid future regret. This is because there are some researchers

that have been conducted in developed countries such as United States and

Europe has found that management style does have a significant impact on the

workplace violence.

Perhaps at the point of time, this variable - management style still does

not reached the alarming stage in Malaysia and in UUM specifically as what

happened in some developed countries. According Rahman and Shamsudin

(2000), to a study by the International Labor Organization (ILO) shows it may

be a relief to many of us in Malaysia to find that, based on the ILO survey,

workplace violence has not yet reached an alarming situation in this country.

But this is not to deny its existence in Malaysian organizations since a number

of government agencies and bodies are directly involved with the incidents of

workplace violence in this country.


68/94

56

The statistical figures are very small; they may not really mirror the

reality of the incidences of workplace violence or indicate the insignificance of

it. This is because oftentimes, cases of workplace go unreported (Atkinson,

2000). Indeed, if violent cases were to be recorded, then it will not come as a

surprise for a higher figure to be reported.

5.3.3 Research question three

The results exhibited in table 4.5 shows that there is no significant

relationship between co-worker relationship and workplace violence in UUM.

This finding is also inconsistent with the research finding which some

researchers in developed country have done. The researcher of this study is

trying to understand the reason why the findings is not consistent with other

researches done in developed countries and found that the relationship among

co-workers in UUM are close to each other as they treat each other as brother

and sister. This strong relation is influenced by the national culture and values

of the country that encourages everyone to treat their friends / co-worker as

family members.

Due to the strong relationship that has been built for years, if there is

any disagreement happens between them, they can tolerate with the

disagreement. For this reason, co-worker relationship does not have

significant impact on the workplace violence in UUM. On the contrary, the

relationship among the co-worker in the developed countries are weak and


69/94

57

formal basics, in the event of any disagreements in work, there is no

tolerations and will further lea

Mohammad Ahmad Hussain

Documents

Transcript of Mohammad Ahmad Hussain