Session Number: Job Satisfaction, Stress, and Faculty Turnover Intention. Presenter: David Coniglio, EdD, PA-C

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Session Number: Job Satisfaction, Stress, and Faculty Turnover Intention. Presenter: David Coniglio, EdD, PA-C"

Alban Henry
5 years ago
Views:

Session Number: 0598-000144 Job Satisfaction, Stress, and

1 Session Number: Job Satisfaction, Stress, and Faculty Turnover Intention Presenter: David Coniglio, EdD, PA-C

2 Turnover Intention Turnover Intention Intent-to-stay a measure of a purposeful decision to remain in a setting (Cho, Johanson, & Guchait, 2009; Tett and Meyer, 1993) Intent-to-leave a measure of an individual s thoughts and actions indicating a desire to leave a setting in a specified amount of time (Barnes, Agogo, & Coombs, 1998; Daly & Dee, 2006; Heckert & Farabee, 2006; Rosser, 2004; Ryan, Healy & Sullivan, 2012; Smart, 1990: Xu, 2009; Zhou & Volkwein, 2004) some believe that they measure different intentions or behaviors (Cho, Johanson, & Guchait, 2009)

3 Literature Review Factors associated with high intention to stay in academia for PA faculty (Graham & Beltyukova, 2015) Research support Research mentor and institutional mentor Denial of feeling overwhelmed by workload or time demands Fair promotion process Recognition by administration Predictors of PA faculty intent to leave a current position (Coniglio & Akroyd, 2015) Perceived organizational support (negative correlation) Role conflict (positive correlation) Age (negative correlation)

4 Purpose of Study Determine if respondent characteristics, job satisfaction factors, or stress explained PA faculty turnover intention.

5 Methods Exempt Status - Institutional Review Board Request for use of limited data set and proposal for research approved by PAEA Research Office Limited data set from 2014 Research Report of the Physician Assistant Education Association (Faculty and Directors) o Demographics and professional characteristics o Job satisfaction, stress, and job trends (intent to leave)

6 Survey Variables Respondent demographics o Age o Gender o Race Respondent professional characteristics o Highest degree held o Faculty rank o Tenure status

7 Survey Variables Rating of satisfaction with. Schedule flexibility Quality of students Curriculum Other benefits Job responsibilities Support staff Student-faculty ratio Tenure requirements Research opportunities Promotion potential Salary Teaching workload Current academic rank Institutional leadership Clinical work arrangement Program management/leadership Didactic/clinical teaching environment Community service opportunities Opportunities for faculty Opportunities for faculty development within the development outside the institution institution Scoring: Likert-like scale of 1=very dissatisfied to 5 = very satisfied, then aggregated to satisfied, neutral, not satisfied, not applicable (deleted from the analysis)

8 Survey Variables Extent of stress in the past two years: Increased workload Lack of personal time Colleagues Teaching load Personal finances Students Physical health Faculty meetings Committee work Self-imposed high expectations Institutional procedures/ red tape Managing household responsibilities Institutional budget cuts Review/promotion process Research/publishing demands Child care Underprepared students Subtle discrimination Job security Scoring: Likert-like scale of 1= extensive, 2 = somewhat, 3 = not at all, 4 = not applicable (deleted from the analysis)

9 Survey Variables Intent to Leave Survey items: During the past two years have you considered leaving o academia for another job o your current institution for another institution Response categories: Yes/No

10 Statistical Analysis Descriptive statistics Means: Respondent Age Frequencies: Gender, Race, Highest Degree Held, Faculty Rank, Tenure Status Multivariate analysis Logistic Regression Odds Ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals Level of significance p < 0.05

11 Results Response Rate: estimated 59% Demographics Age n Mean SD Median Faculty Program Directors Medical Directors All Faculty and Directors Gender Faculty n % Program Directors n % Medical Directors n % Female Male

12 Results Professional Characteristics Race N % Caucasian Non-Caucasian/ Other/Not reported Faculty Rank N % Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Lecturer Highest Degree Held N % Doctorate Masters Baccalaureate Associates/Other Tenure Status N % Tenured/tenure track Not tenure track or tenure not offered at institution

13 Results Logistic Regression Intent-to-leave program Variable B Wald df p Odds Ratio 95% CI Lower 95%CI Upper Gender (F) Doctorate Satisfaction Inst Lead Satisfaction Prog Lead Satisfaction Promo Opp Stress Colleagues Stress Committee Stress Red Tape Stress Discriminate

14 Results Logistic Regression Intent-to-leave academia Variable B Wald df p Odds Ratio 95% CI Lower 95%CI Upper Satisfaction Inst Lead Satisfaction Salary Satisfaction Workload Stress Colleagues Stress Lack of Personal Time Stress Discriminate

15 Discussion Odds of Staying Program Women faculty Satisfied with Institutional leadership Program leadership Promotion opportunity Decreased stress from Colleagues Red tape Subtle discrimination Odds of Leaving Program Doctoral degree

16 Discussion Odds of Staying Academia Satisfied with Institutional leadership Salary Workload Decreased stress from Colleagues Lack of Personal Time Subtle discrimination Odds of Leaving Academia None significant

17 Limitations Secondary data set Researcher has no control over the data Survey methodology Collection and aggregation of data Categorization of responses Estimates of response rate Measures of satisfaction, stress, and intent to leave are not validated survey scales Response bias

18 Discussion Previous research has show organizational support is highly correlated with turnover intention Correlates of job satisfaction and extent of stress may also be related to intent to leave or intent to stay These pilot data suggest future additional research using validated scales of job satisfaction and stress may further inform us about important issues in PA faculty worklife

19 References Barnes, L. L. B., Agago, M. O., & Coombs, W. T. (1998). Effects of job-related stress on faculty intention to leave academia. Research in Higher Education, 39, Cho, S., Johanson, M. M., & Guchait, P. (2009). Employees intent to leave: A comparison of determinants of intent to leave versus intent to stay. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28, Coniglio, D, & Akroyd, D. (2015). Factors predicting physician assistant turnover intention The Journal of Physician Assistant Education, 26(3), Daly, C. J., & Dee, J. R. (2006). Greener pastures: Faculty turnover intent in urban public universities. The Journal of Higher Education, 77, Graham, K, & Beltyukova, S. (2015). Development and validation of a measure of intention to stay in academia for physician assistant faculty. The Journal of Physician Assistant Education, 26(1), Heckert, T. M., Farabee, A. M. (2006). Turnover intentions of the faculty at a teaching-focused university. Psychological Reports, 99, Rosser, V. J. (2004). Faculty members intentions to leave: A national study on their worklife and satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 45, Ryan, J. F., Healy, R., Sullivan, J. (2012). Oh, won t you stay? Predictors of faculty intent to leave a public research university. Higher Education, 63, Smart, J. (1990). A causal model of faculty turnover intentions. Research in Higher Education, 31, Tett, R., & Meyer, J. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and turnover: Path analyses based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46, Xu, Y. J. (2008). Faculty turnover: Discipline-specific attention is warranted. Research in Higher Education, 49, Zhou, Y., & Volkwein, J.F. (2004). Examining the influences on faculty departure intentions: A comparison of tenured versus nontenured faculty at research universities using NSOPF-99. Research in Higher Education, 45,

2007 Kansas State University Community and Climate Survey

2007 Kansas State University Community and Climate Survey In the Spring of 2007 the Kansas State University (K-State) Community and Climate Survey was distributed to all faculty to assess their perceptions