1

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

This chapter presents the introduction, statement of

the problem, significance of the study and scope and

delimitation of the study.

Introduction

Medical Sales Representative are considered the

lifeblood of the company to which they work for. They are

responsible for the promotion, sales and profit generation

of the company. The company and its logistics rely largely

on the output or production driven by the individual and

concerted efforts of people in the field creating sales, the

medreps.

Research, development, and acquisition of new products

in a company are mostly influenced by the reports and sales

performance delivered by medreps as they know well the

demands for a particular line or lines of products in their

respective configured territory. When sales is high more

2

productions will be required and more jobs will be

generated.

The challenge of pharma executives is how to

spot and hire the right man for the job, how to retain good

performing medical representatives, and how to keep them

burning with strong motivation and desire to stay with the

company and maintain a sustainable and growing sales output.

Unlike ordinary employees, more is being expected from

medreps. They are not only tasked to just work but to work

with great deal of precision to save company’s resources and

to deliver a quantifiable result (Sales Quota) which should

be growth oriented result. Against ordinary office

employees, medreps receive not just basic salary but also

car, bonuses and commissions. A problem begins when a medrep

behaves just like an ordinary 8am to 5pm employee who

simply relied on his 15th and 30th pay and his drive to walk

an extra mile and excel is lost. The issue is how to avoid

medreps with such mentality and how to keep the motivation

high for those who have already been employed. On the other

hand when a medrep is a performer he is most likely to be

3

pirated by other competitor companies. He will be most

likely offered higher salary, a car, higher incentives and

other stuff. The challenge is what will make him refuse the

offer and keep his high commitment and loyalty with the

company?

One of the leadership styles adopted by

pharmaceutical companies is transformational leadership. It

is perceived to be associated with many organizational

outcomes such as satisfaction, group performance,

organizational performance and commitment. As organizational

commitment is positively correlated with work efforts,

performance and negatively correlated with absenteeism and

turnover (Luchak & Gellatly, 2007; Allen & Meyer, 1996; Paré

and Tremblay, 2007), it is imperative to study these

leadership style and its impact on the level of

organizational commitment of medreps. No organization can

perform at peak levels unless each employee is committed to

the organization’s objectives and works as an effective team

member. It is no longer good enough to have employees who

come to work faithfully every day and do their jobs

4

independently. Thus, the commitment of competent employees

is critical to the success of the organization.

Statement of the Problem

The general problem of the study is : How do

transformational leadership of the managers relate to the

level of organizational commitment of medical representative

employees in the pharmaceutical industry?

Specifically, the study sought answers to the following

questions:

1. What is the profile of the employees in terms of:

1.1 Gender;

1.2 Age;

1.3 Civil Status;

1.4 Work Experience

1.5 Education

1.6 Salary?(Optional)

2. To what extent do the managers practice the

transformational leadership in terms of:

2.1 Idealized Influence

5

2.2 Inspirational Motivation

2.3 Intellectual Stimulation

2.4 Individualized Consideration

2.5 Contingent Reward

2.6 Management-by-exception

2.7 Laissez-faire Leadership?

3. What is the level of the organizational commitment

of employees in terms of affectifve, normative and

continuance?

4. Are there significant relationships between the

profile of the employees and managers level of

transformational leadership and the organizational

commitment of employees?

Significance of the Study

The question that every leader must address is, what

factors contribute to an employee’s desire to remain

committed to the organization? This question is very

important in order to maintain a competent workforce. The

reasons behind employees leaving an organization range from

6

lack of job satisfaction, incompatibility with co-workers,

to a changing family structure (Ackoff, 1999). Liden, Wayne

and Sparrowe (2000) pointed out that employees appreciate

leaders and organizations that provide opportunities for

decision latitude, challenges, responsibility and meaning,

impact, as well as self-determination.

The result of this study will benefit the pharma

companies, district supervisors, regional managers, national

managers, product managers, HRM, local pharma distributors,

medical representatives themselves, and all other sales

related businesses with field sales activities. This will

guide them in increasing the level of organizational

commitment of medreps through effective transformational

leadership style to be excercised by managers. Overall,

this study will have significance on the following: Top

Management. Through this research, pharma executives will

be able to maximize production, sales and profitability by

taking into account the organizational commitment of it’s

people. They can provide some antidote or sort of

guidelines to resolve the issues of medical representatives

7

and their supervisors. Furthermore, this study could give

the top management, the right motivation required from

supervisors and managers needed to boost the morale of each

medrep and maintain a healthy and highly competitive and

productive environment.

Regional Manager. In this research, regional

managers will be enlightened on what training modules to

prepare and what leadership measurement to use to guide

their supervisors on the manner in which they should deal

with their medreps.

District Supervisors. This study will enable

the supervisors to adjust their manners of dealing with

their medreps in ways that would enhance their individual

level of commitment to deliver higher sales performance.

This will guide supervisors on how to make their medreps

happy and satisfied with the company and with their job to

give them reason to stay longer and consistently at their

best performance.

HRM. This study may guide the HRM department on

matters concerning the hiring of the medreps in terms of

8

age, gender, civil status and educational background which

may in one way or the other has something to do with the

level of drive or motivation of a person into sales

business.

Local Pharma Distributor. This study may serve

as a guide for local distributors in their process of

selection and hiring for medical representatives. Also, this

study may aid them in acquiring the skills of

transformational leadership style and be able to increase

the level of medreps’ organizational commitment without

having to pay extra cost.

Medical Representative. This study may help medreps

better understand why they are at certain level of

motivation and performance and perhaps change their

perspective and try to become self motivated individuals.

This study may also aid the medreps to understand better why

his/her relationship with the company and his supervisor is

not so good and perhaps find ways to bring the issue to them

and finally put an end to the animosity. The management may

take a second look once they voice it out to them and may

9

plan actions to remedy the problem. Further, this study will

also prepare the medrep to become an effective supervisor

once promoted.

Clients. Through this study, the clients may get the

best service possible as a result of a highly motivated

medrep. In effect, clients will be more satisfied and would

mostlikely patronize more the products being promoted by

the medrep.

Researchers. This study could also benefit some future

research in analyzing certain considerations that affects

the level of organizational commitment of the employees in

relation to transformational leadership and profile factors

not only in the pharma industry but also in any business

organizations. This will serve as their guide in making a

related research about the level of organizational

commitment in any business entity.

Scope and Delimitation

The scope of this study includes medical

representatives from both local, national and multinational

10

pharmaceutical companies. Companies like Novartis, Pfizer,

Unilab, Lloyd Lab. Lynnmed, etc., with medreps covering

Malolos areas were included. Sets of questionnaires were

distributed in a Pediatric clinic, through the coordination

and support of a pediatrician and her secretary, to cover

medical representatives promoting pedia products. Another

sets of questionnaires were distributed in an Internal

Medicine practicing MD clinics to research on medical

representatives handling adult medicine products. The

doctors and their respective secretaries involved in

gathering of data were instructed to ask respondents to

completely fill out the questionnaires. Two weeks were

allocated for the research and respondents were chosen at

random. Respondents were not allowed to take out the

questionnaires but were required to fill them out at the

medreps waiting area outside the clinic and were requested

to immediately return the forms after completion. During the

whole process of research and data gathering, no major

problems were encountered except that some medreps refuse

to answer the questionnaires while some failed to complete

11

the form due to time constrained as they hopped from clinic

to clinic trying to catch Doctors’ time for their

promotional coverage. At the end of two weeks, of the 100

sample questionnaires distributed, only 60 were completed

and retrieved which had become the subject of this study. To

show appreciation for the efforts and cooperation of doctors

and secretaries, the reaseacher gave them some token which

they can use everyday.

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

12

This chapter discussed the relevant theories, related

literature and studies, conceptual framework, hypotheses of

the study and the operational definition of variables. The

discussion in this chapter integrates the logical beliefs

of the researcher with the findings of earlier researches as

the scientific basis for investigating the problem.

Relevant Theories

Transformational Theory transcends transactional

leadership and rather than describing a set of specific

behaviours, it outlines an ongoing process by which "leaders

and followers raise one another to higher levels of morality

and motivation" [Leadership, p20]. The leader’s fundamental

act is to induce people to be aware or conscious of what

they feel - to feel their true needs so strongly, to define

their values so meaningfully, that they can be moved to

purposeful action." [Macgregor [Leadership, pp 43-44]

13

Situational Leadership Theory. The best action

of the leader depends on a range of situational factors.

When a decision is needed, an effective leader does not just

fall into a single preferred style, such as using

transactional or transformational methods. In practice, as

they say, things are not that simple.

Factors that affect situational decisions include motivation

and capability of followers. This, in turn, is affected by

factors within the particular situation. The relationship

between followers and the leader may be another factor that

affects leader behavior as much as it does follower

behavior. The leaders' perception of the follower and the

situation will affect what they do rather than the truth of

the situation. The leader's perception of themselves and

other factors such as stress and mood will also modify the

leaders' behavior.

Yukl (1989) seeks to combine other approaches and identifies

six variables:

14

Subordinate effort: the motivation and actual effort

expended.

Subordinate ability and role clarity: followers knowing

what to do and how to do it.

Organization of the work: the structure of the work and

utilization of resources.

Cooperation and cohesiveness: of the group in working

together.

Resources and support: the availability of tools,

materials, people, etc.

External coordination: the need to collaborate with

other groups.

Leaders here work on such factors as external relationships,

acquisition of resources, managing demands on the group and

managing the structures and culture of the group. Tannenbaum

and Schmidt (1958) identified three forces that led to the

leader's action: the forces in the situation, the forces in

the follower and also forces in the leader. This recognizes

15

that the leader's style is highly variable, and even such

distant events as a family argument can lead to the

displacement activity of a more aggressive stance in an

argument than usual. Maier (1963) noted that leaders not

only consider the likelihood of a follower accepting a

suggestion, but also the overall importance of getting

things done. Thus in critical situations, a leader is more

likely to be directive in style simply because of the

implications of failure.

Participative Leadership Theory. Involvement in

decision-making improves the understanding of the issues

involved by those who must carry out the decisions. People

are more committed to actions where they have involved in

the relevant decision-making. People are less competitive

and more collaborative when they are working on joint goals.

When people make decisions together, the social commitment

to one another is greater and thus increases their

commitment to the decision. Several people deciding together

make better decisions than one person alone.

16

A Participative Leader, rather than taking autocratic

decisions, seeks to involve other people in the process,

possibly including subordinates, peers, superiors and other

stakeholders. Often, however, as it is within the managers'

whim to give or deny control to his or her subordinates,

most participative activity is within the immediate team.

The question of how much influence others are given thus may

vary on the manager's preferences and beliefs, and a whole

spectrum of participation is possible, as in the table

below.

Personal Behavior Theories identified two

more Styles of Leadership: job-centered (task) and

employee-centered (people). The job-centered (task-

initiating structure) behavior focuses on the leader taking

control in order to get the job done and the employee-

centered (people-consideration) behavior focuses on the

leader meeting the needs of employees and developing

relationships (Lussier & Achua, 2004). This theory

indicated that leaders who were highly employee oriented and

17

allowed participation fostered more productive teams. On

the other hand, leaders who were more concerned about

accomplishing tasks cultivated lower producing teams

Path- goal theory influences and motivates

employee’s views and opportunities. Employee contentment,

accomplishment of goals and improved functioning would be

derived from the leader’s direction, training, guidance and

support.

Great Man Theory. There’s an assumption that

‘leaders are born and not made’ and that ‘great leaders will

arise when there is a great need’. The 'great man' theory

was originally proposed by Thomas Carlyle.

Gender issues were not on the table when the 'Great Man'

theory was proposed. Most leaders were male and the thought

of a Great Woman was generally in areas other than

leadership. Most researchers were also male, and concerns

about androcentric bias were a long way from being realized.

It has been said that history is nothing but stories of

18

great men. Certainly, much has this bias, although there is

of course also much about peoples and broader life.

Role Theory. People define roles for themselves

and others based on social learning and reading. People form

expectations about the roles that they and others will play.

People subtly encourage others to act within the role

expectations they have for them. People will act within the

roles they adopt. We all have internal schemas about the

role of leaders, based on what we read, discuss and so on.

We subtly send these expectations to our leaders, acting as

role senders, for example through the balance of decisions

we take upon ourselves and the decisions we leave to the

leader. Leaders are influenced by these signals,

particularly if they are sensitive to the people around

them, and will generally conform to these, playing the

leadership role that is put upon them by others.

Within organizations, there is much formal and informal

information about what the leader's role should be,

including 'leadership values', culture, training sessions,

19

modeling by senior managers, and so on. These and more

(including contextual factors) act to shape expectations and

behaviors around leadership. Role conflict can also occur

when people have differing expectations of their leaders. It

also happens when leaders have different ideas about what

they should be doing vs. the expectations that are put upon

them. Role expectations of a leader can vary from very

specific to a broad idea within which the leader can define

their own style. When role expectations are low or mixed,

then this may also lead to role conflict.

Contingent Theory. The leader's ability to lead

is contingent upon various situational factors, including

the leader's preferred style, the capabilities and behaviors

of followers and also various other situational factors.

Contingency theories are a class of behavioral theory that

contend that there is no one best way of leading and that a

leadership style that is effective in some situations may

not be successful in others. An effect of this is that

leaders who are very effective at one place and time may

20

become unsuccessful either when transplanted to another

situation or when the factors around them change. This helps

to explain how some leaders who seem for a while to have the

'Midas touch' suddenly appear to go off the boil and make

very unsuccessful decisions.

Contingency theory is similar to situational theory in that

there is an assumption of no simple one right way. The main

difference is that situational theory tends to focus more on

the behaviors that the leader should adopt, given

situational factors (often about follower behavior), whereas

contingency theory takes a broader view that includes

contingent factors about leader capability and other

variables within the situation.

Instinct Theory of Motivation According to

instinct theories, people are motivated to behave in certain

ways because they are evolutionarily programmed to do so. An

example of this in the animal world is seasonal migration.

These animals do not learn to do this, it is instead an

inborn pattern of behavior. Here are list of human

21

instincts that included such things as attachment, play,

shame, anger, fear, shyness, modesty and love.

Incentive Theory of Motivation. The incentive

theory suggests that people are motivated to do things

because of external rewards. For example, you might be

motivated to go to work each day for the monetary reward of

being paid. Behavioral learning concepts such as association

and reinforcement play an important role in this theory of

motivation.

Humanistic Theory of Motivation are based on

the idea that people also have strong cognitive reasons to

perform various actions. This is famously illustrated in

Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs, which presents

different motivations at different levels. First, people are

motivated to fulfill basic biological needs for food and

shelter, as well as those of safety, love and esteem. Once

the lower level needs have been met, the primary motivator

becomes the need for self-actualization, or the desire to

22

fulfill one's individual potential. [A Closer Look at Some

Important Theories of Motivation By Kendra Cherry, About.com

Guide]

Content theory of motivation, highlights the

specific factors that motivate an individual. Although these

factors are found within an individual, things outside the

individual can affect him or her as well. In short, all

people have needs that they want satisfied. Some are primary

needs, such as those for food, sleep, and water—needs that

deal with the physical aspects of behavior and are

considered unlearned. These needs are biological in nature

and relatively stable. Their influences on behavior are

usually obvious and hence easy to identify.

Two-factor theory, [Herzberg] identifies two sets of

factors that impact motivation in the workplace:

Hygiene factors include salary, job security, working

conditions, organizational policies, and technical

quality of supervision. Although these factors do not

motivate employees, they can cause dissatisfaction if

23

they are missing. Something as simple as adding music

to the office place or implementing a no-smoking policy

can make people less dissatisfied with these aspects of

their work. However, these improvements in hygiene

factors do not necessarily increase satisfaction.

Satisfiers or motivators include such things as

responsibility, achievement, growth opportunities, and

feelings of recognition, and are the key to job

satisfaction and motivation. For example, managers can

find out what people really do in their jobs and make

improvements, thus increasing job satisfaction and

performance.

Alderfer's ERG theory. Clayton Alderfer's ERG

(Existence, Relatedness, Growth) theory is built upon

Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory. To begin his theory,

Alderfer collapses Maslow's five levels of needs into three

categories.

24

Existence needs are desires for physiological and

material well-being. (In terms of Maslow's model,

existence needs include physiological and safety needs)

Relatedness needs are desires for satisfying

interpersonal relationships. (In terms of Maslow's

model, relatedness correspondence to social needs)

Growth needs are desires for continued psychological

growth and development. (In terms of Maslow's model,

growth needs include esteem and self-realization needs)

This approach proposes that unsatisfied needs motivate

behavior, and that as lower level needs are satisfied, they

become less important. Higher level needs, though, become

more important as they are satisfied, and if these needs are

not met, a person may move down the hierarchy, which

Alderfer calls the frustration-regression principle. What he

means by this term is that an already satisfied lower level

need can become reactivated and influence behavior when a

higher level need cannot be satisfied. As a result, managers

25

should provide opportunities for workers to capitalize on

the importance of higher level needs.

McClelland's acquired needs theory. David

McClelland's acquired needs theory recognizes that everyone

prioritizes needs differently. He also believes that

individuals are not born with these needs, but that they are

actually learned through life experiences. McClelland

identifies three specific needs:

Need for achievement is the drive to excel.

Need for power is the desire to cause others to behave

in a way that they would not have behaved otherwise.

Need for affiliation is the desire for friendly, close

interpersonal relationships and conflict avoidance.

McClelland associates each need with a distinct set of work

preferences, and managers can help tailor the environment to

meet these needs. High achievers differentiate themselves

from others by their desires to do things better. These

26

individuals are strongly motivated by job situations with

personal responsibility, feedback, and an intermediate

degree of risk.

Related Literature

Organizational Commitment. Literally hundreds of

studies have been conducted to identify factors involved in

the development of organizational commitment. For example,

research has shown that commitment has been positively

related to personal characteristics such as age (Mathieu &

Zajac, 1990), length of service in a particular organization

(Luthans, McCaul, & Dodd, 1985), and marital status (John &

Taylor, 1999) and negatively related to the employee’s level

of education (Glisson & Durick, 1988). In addition,

commitment has been found to be related to such job

characteristics as task autonomy (Dunham, Grube, &

Castaneda, 1994), feedback (Hutichison & Garstka, 1996) and

job challenge (Meyer, Irving, & Allen, 1998) and certain

work experiences such as job security (Yousef, 1998),

27

promotion opportunities (Gaertner & Nollen, 1989), training

and mentoring opportunities (Scandura, 1997), and supportive

and considerate leadership (DeCottis & Summers, 1987).

Finally, research studies have revealed that commitment is

influenced by perceptions of organizational justice

(McFarlin & Sweeny, 1992).

Leadership. Leadership is a process of

interaction between leaders and followers where the leader

attempts to influence followers to achieve a common goal

(Northouse, 2010; Yukl, 2005). According to Chen and Chen

(2008), previous studies on leadership have identified

different types of leadership styles which leaders adopt in

managing organizations (e.g., Davis, 2003; Spears &

Lawrence, 2003; House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta,

2004; Hirtz, Murray, & Riordam, 2007). Among the more

prominent leadership styles are Burns’ (1978) transactional

and transformational leadership styles. Transformational

leaders emphasise followers’ intrinsic motivation and

personal development. They seek to align followers’

aspirations and needs with

28

desired organisational outcomes. In so doing,

transformational leaders are able to foster followers’

commitment to the organisations and inspire them to exceed

their expected performance (Sivanathan & Fekken, 2002; Miia,

Nichole, Karlos, Jaakko,

& Ali, 2006; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Bass, 1985, 1998). With

regard to today’s complex organisations and dynamic business

environment, transformational leaders are often seen as

ideal agents of change who could lead followers in times of

uncertainties and high risk-taking. In contrast,

transactional leaders gain legitimacy through the use of

rewards, praises and promises that would satisfy followers’

immediate needs (Northouse, 2010). They engage followers by

offering rewards in exchange for the achievement of desired

goals (Burns, 1978). Although transformational leadership is

generally regarded as more desirable than transactional,

Locke, Kirkpatrick, Wheeler, Schneider, Niles, Goldstein,

Welsh, & Chah, (1999) pointed out that such contention is

misleading. They argued that all leadership is in fact

transactional, even though such transactions are not

29

confined to only shortterm rewards. An effective leader must

appeal to the self-interest of followers and use a mixture

of short-term and long-term rewards in order to lead

followers towards achieving organisational goals.

Idealised influence concerns the formulation and

articulation of vision and challenging goals and motivating

followers to work beyond their self-interest in order to

achieve common goals (Dionne, Yammarino, Atwater & Spangler,

2004). In this dimension, leaders act as role models who are

highly admired, respected and trusted by their followers

(Bass & Riggio, 2006). According to Bass and Riggio (2006),

leaders with great idealised influence are willing to take

risks and are consistent rather than arbitrary by

demonstrating high standards of ethical and moral conduct.

Inspirational motivation refers to the way leaders

motivate and inspire their followers to commit to the vision

of the organization. Leaders with inspirational motivation

foster strong team spirit as a means for leading team

members towards achieving desired goals (Antonakis, Avolio,

& Sivasurbramaniam, 2003; Bass & Riggio, 2006).

30

Intellectual stimulation is concerned with the role of

leaders in stimulating innovation and creativity in their

followers by questioning assumptions and approaching old

situations in new ways (Bass & Riggio, 2006; Nicholason,

2007). They always encourage their followers to try new

approaches or methods to solve the old problems.

Individualized consideration refers to leaders paying

special attention to each individual follower’s need for

achievement and growth by acting as a coach or mentor (Bass

& Riggio, 2006; Nicholason, 2007).

Leadership and commitment. Zeffanne (2003: 979)

states that “the answer to the question of employee

commitment, morale, loyalty and attachment may consist not

only in providing motivators, but also to remove

demotivators such as styles of management not suited to

their context and to contemporary employee aspirations”.

Thus, a leadership or management style that encourages

employee involvement can help to satisfy employees’ desire

for empowerment and demand for a commitment to

organizational goals. Similarly, Gaertner (2000: 487) argues

31

that “more flexible and participatory management styles can

strongly and positively enhance organisational commitment”.

Organisations need to ensure that leadership strategies are

aimed at improving employee commitment rather than

compliance as with autocratic leadership style. Kanter

(1999) for example, suggests that, in order to build

commitment to change, managers should: allow employees to

participate; provide a clear picture or vision of the

future; share information; demonstrate commitment to the

change; tell employees exactly what is expected of them; and

offer positive reinforcement. This removes uncertainty in

members of the organisation in terms of what their roles are

and the future direction of the organisation. Stum (1999)

argues that employee commitment reflects the quality of the

leadership in the organisation. Therefore it is logical to

assume that leadership behavior has a significant

relationship with the development of organisational

commitment, and that the relationship is quite unpredictable

in a post merger phase given that any organisational change

32

is associated with uncertainty, doubt and fear for the

unknown.

Organizational Commitment is highly valuable. Organizational

commitment is vital for productivity, quality & good

performance of an organization. Numerous empirical evidence

regarding job commitment & its relationship with job

satisfaction has been offered. These findings reveal that

the level of job commitment can also be influenced by

various factors such as demography, pay, co–workers, work

supervision, company’s background & employee’s job–

satisfaction level. (i.e. central life interest) Strongly

committed employees are more likely to remain with the

organization than are those with weak commitment. Commitment

may even be better predictor of turn over than job

satisfaction because it is influenced less by day to day

happenings than is job satisfaction (Porter et al – 1974)

There are two dominant conceptualizations of

organizational commitment in sociological literature. These

are an employee’s loyalty towards the organization and an

employee’s intention to stay with the organization. Loyalty

33

is an affective response to, and identification with, an

organization, based on a sense of duty and responsibility.

One may use Herscovitch and Meyer’s definition: ‘the degree

to which an employee identifies with the goals and values of

the organization and is willing to exert effort to help it

succeed’. Loyalty is argued to be an important intervening

variable between the structural conditions of work, and the

values, and expectations, of employees, and their decision

to stay, or leave. (Mowday Etal 1979, P. 226.)

Positive and rewarding features of work are expected to

increase loyalty, which , in turn, will reduce the

likelihood of leaving. Loyalty becomes stabilized with

tenure, which partly explains the negative relationship

typically found between tenure and turnover. Intent to stay

is portrayed as effectively neutral, and focuses on an

employee’s intention to remain a member of the organization.

It is much closer to economists’ ideas on how weighing the

costs of leaving versus staying, decides the employee to

leave or stay. Hagen defines this form of commitment as the

employee’s expected likelihood of remaining employed in the

34

same organization. Theoretically, it is viewed as an

intervening response to structural conditions of work, as

well as conditions of work elsewhere, or to not working at

all.

Meyer and Allen present three approaches, define their

three dimensional constructs as affective, continuance and

normative commitment. These components of commitment have

been identified in the literature: 1. Affective Commitment;

The individuals affective or emotional attachment to the

organization. (i.e. individuals stay with organization

because they want to.) 2. Continuance Commitment; The

perceived costs associated with leaving the organization

(i.e. the individual stays with the organization because

they need to) 3. Normative Commitment; An individuals felt

obligation to remain with the organization (i.e., the

individual stays with the organization because they feel

they caught to do so).

Continuance commitment refers to commitment

based on the costs that the employee associates with leaving

the organization [due to the high cost of leaving].

35

Potential antecedents of continuance commitment include age,

tenure, career satisfaction and intent to leave. Age and

tenure can function as predictors of continuance commitment,

primarily because of their roles as surrogate measures of

investment in the organization. Normative commitment refers

to an employee’s feeling of obligation to remain with the

organization [based on the employee having internalized the

values and goals of the organization].

Gender. There was significant difference

between employed women and men’s job satisfaction and job

involvement. Oshagbemi, T. (2000) found that female

academics at higher ranks are more satisfied and involved in

their job as compared with their male counterpart. These

findings were supported by Jayaratne and Chess (1983) who

reported a statistically significant difference between male

and female social woek administrators regarding role

ambiguity and work load. This is contrary to the findings

by Greenberg and Baron (1993) who reported that employed

women in general seem to be less satisfied and involved

with their work than these male counterpart. Al – Ajmi

36

(2006) in his study confirmed that the employees gender has

mo significant effect on her/his perception of job

satisfaction and organizational commitment.

Age. Research has shown that the age is positively

related to organizational commitment ( Steers,1977; Mathieu

& Zajac,1990; Angle & Perry,1981). One possible explanation

for this relationship is that there are few employment

options available to older employees ( Mowday etal.,1982),

and older employees realize that leaving may cost them more

than staying ( Parasuraman & Nachman,1987).

Tenure. Research indicates that organizational

tenure is positively related to organizational commitment

( Kishman,1992; Matthieu & Zajac,1990; Meyer & Allen, 1997).

Although empirical evidence suggests that there is a

positive link between organizational commitment and tenure,

it is still not clear how this line operates.

Laissez-Faire Leadership. Laissez-faire leadership is

a passive kind of leadership style. There is no relationship

exchange between the leader and the followers. It represents

37

a non-transactional kind of leadership style in which

necessary decisions are not made, actions are delayed,

leadership responsibilities ignored, and authority unused.

A leader displaying this form of non-leadership is perceived

as not caring at all about others’ issues. Employees are not

satisfied under laissez-faire leadership. There is a

positive association between individualized consideration

and all the employee job satisfaction sub-variables. These

results are consistent with previous studies showing the

significant positive influence of transformational

leadership factors on employee job satisfaction and the

significant negative influence of laissez-faire leadership

on subordinates’ job satisfaction (Bass and Avolio 1994;

Loke, 2001; Bass 1998; Avolio 1999, Shim et al. 2002; Waldman

et al 2001; Lok and Crawford 1999; Howell and Avolio1993).

Related Studies

Tranformational Leadership and Organizational

Commitment. Past studies have constantly reported that

38

transformational leadership is more effective, productive,

innovative, and satisfying to followers as both parties work

towards the good of organization propelled by shared visions

and values as well as mutual trust and respect (Avolio and

Bass, 1991; Fairholm, 1991; Lowe, Kroeck and

Sivasubrahmaniam, 1996; Stevens, D’Intino and Victor, 1995).

Lower correlation coefficients between

transformational leadership and normative and continuance

commitment were found. The findings have further indicated

that no correlation was found between transactional

leadership and affective, normative and continuance

commitment. Transformational leadership helps to increase

trust, commitment and team efficacy (Arnold, Barling and

Kelloway, 2001). Bass and Avolio (1994) It was revealed that

transformational leaders who encourage their followers to

think critically and creatively can have an influence on

their followers’ commitment. This is further supported by

(Walumbwa and Lawler, 2003) that transformational leaders

can motivate and increase followers’ motivation and

organizational commitment by getting them to solve problems

39

creatively and also understanding their needs. (Price, 1997)

further suggests that employees are far more likely to be

committed to the organization if they have confidence with

their leaders. (Bass and Avolio, 1994)

Studies have indicated a positive direct

relationship between three dimensions of transformational

leadership styles, namely intellectual stimulation,

idealized influence, and inspirational motivation, with

affective and normative commitment. Similarly, two

dimensions of transformational leadership, namely,

intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration

were found to have positive relationship with continuance

commitment. Employees who stay with an organization because

they feel obligated or having no choice do not exhibit the

same eagerness and involvement as employees who stay with an

organization. As such, transformational leadership behaviors

are not as strongly related to continuance commitment as to

affective and normative commitment. (Arnold, Barling and

Kelloway, 2001) This implies that the leaders who give

advices, supports, and pay attention to the individual needs

40

of followers will enhance the level of organizational

commitment of the employees (Kent and Chelladurai, 2001).

Affective Commitment Allen and Meyer (1990)

refer to affective commitment as the employee’s emotional

attachment to, identification with and involvement in the

organization. Affective commitment involves three aspects;

the formation of an emotional attachment to an organization,

identification with and the desire to maintain

organizational membership. Allen and Meyer (1990) argue that

individuals will develop emotional attachment to an

organization when they identify with the goals of the

organization and are willing to assist the organization in

achieving these goals.

Mowday, Steers and Porter (1979) also described affective

organizational commitment as an active relationship with the

organization such that individuals are willing to give

something of themselves in order to contribute to the

organization’s well-being. From the above descriptions, a

psychological identification and pride of association with

the organization is evident. Employees with a strong

41

affective commitment continue to be a member of the

organization because they want to do so.

Continuance Commitment The second of Allen and Meyer’s

(1990) dimensions of organizational commitment is

continuance commitment, which is based on Becker’s (1990)

side-bet theory. The theory states that as individuals

remain in the employment of an organization for longer

periods, they accumulate investments, which become costly to

lose the longer an individual stays. These investments

include time, job effort, and organization specific skills

that might not be transferable or greater costs of leaving

the

42

organization that discourage them from seeking alternative

employment, work friendships and political deals. Allen and

Meyer (1990) describe continuance commitment as a form of

psychological attachment to an employing organization that

reflects the employees’ participation as the loss that would

otherwise be suffered if they were to leave the

organization.

Employees who work in environments where the skills and

training they get are very industry specific can possibly

develop such commitment. As a result, such employees could

feel compelled to commit to the organization because of the

monetary, social, psychological and other costs associated

with leaving the organization. Unlike affective commitment,

which involves emotional attachment, continuance commitment

reflects a calculation of the costs of leaving versus the

benefits of staying.

Normative Commitment The third dimension of

organizational commitment is normative commitment, which

reflects a feeling of obligation to continue employment.

43

With a high level of normative commitment feel they ought to

remain with the Organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990). Randall

and Cote (1991) regard normative commitment in terms of the

moral obligation the employees develop after the

organization has invested in them. They argue that when

employees start to feel that the organization has spent

either too much time or money developing and training them,

such employees might feel an obligation to stay with the

organization. For example, individuals whose organization

paid for their tuition while they were improving

qualifications might believe that they can reimburse the

organization by continuing to work for it. In general,

normative commitment is most likely when individuals find it

difficult to reciprocate the organization’s investment in

them.

Jaros and his colleagues (1993) refer to normative

commitment as moral commitment. They emphasize the

difference between this kind of commitment and affective

commitment, because normative commitment reflects a sense of

duty, obligation or calling to work in the organization and

44

not emotional attachment. They describe it as the degree to

which an individual is psychologically attached to an

employing organization through internalization of its goals,

values and missions.

The multidimensionality of organizational commitment

reflects its highly complex nature. It is important to

realize that the three different dimensions of

organizational commitment are not mutually exclusive. An

employee can develop one, any combination or all of the

three aspects of commitment. These aspects of organizational

commitments differ only on the bases of their underlying

motives and outcomes (Becker, 1992). For example an employee

with affective commitment will stay with an organization and

be willing to exert more effort in organizational activities

while an employee with continuance commitment may remain

with the organization and not be willing to exert any more

effort than is expected.

Tenure. Research indicates that organizational

tenure is positively related to organizational commitment

(Kushman, 1992; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1997).

45

Although empirical evidence suggests that there is a

positive link between organizational commitment and tenure,

it is still not clear how this link operates. According to

Meyer and Allen (1997), as an individual’s length of service

with a particular organization increases, he or she may

develop an emotional attachment with the organization that

makes it difficult to switch jobs. Meyer and Allen (1997)

also suggest that the results of a positive relationship

between tenure and organizational commitment might be a

simple reflection of the fact that uncommitted employees

leave an organization, and only those with a high commitment

remain. In the light of this evidence, a positive

relationship between organizational commitment was

hypothesized for this study.

Gender. Data obtained from the 1991 “Work

Organizations” module of the General Social Survey (GSS)

reveal a small but significant tendency for employed men to

display higher organizational commitment (OC) than employed

women do. Another study showed that men are more likely

than women to hold jobs with commitment-enhancing features.

46

Gender differences in family ties do little to affect male-

female OC difference. When job attributes, career variables,

and family ties are simultaneously controlled, if anything,

women tend to exhibit slightly greater OC. (Marsden, 2008.

In contrast to implications of some gender models, the

correlates of Organizational Commitment do not appear to be

appreciably different for men and women.(Kalleberg, 2009)

Marital Status. Marital status has emerged as a

consistent predictor of organizational commitment. Findings

reported by Hrebiniak and Alutto (1972), John and Taylor

(1999), and Tsui, Leung, Cheung, Mok, and Ho (1994) indicate

that married people were more committed to their

organization than unmarried people. Married people have more

family responsibilities and need more stability and security

in their jobs; and therefore, they are likely to be more

committed to their current organization than their unmarried

counterparts. In the light of these findings and

explanation, it was hypothesized that marital status would

be positively related to commitment.

47

Education. Level of education was expected to

have a negative relationship with

organizational commitment. The rationale for this prediction

is that people with low levels of educations generally have

more difficulty changing jobs and therefore show a greater

commitment to their organizations. Steers (1977) and Glisson

and Durick (1988) have reported findings consistent with

this rationale.

Length of Service. Research indicates that

organizational tenure is positively related to

organizational commitment ( Kishman,1992; Matthieu &

Zajac,1990; Meyer & Allen, 1997). Although empirical

evidence suggests that there is a positive link between

organizational commitment and tenure, it is still not clear

how this line operates.

According to Meyer and Allen (1997), as an individual’s

length of service with a particular organization increases,

he or she may develop an emotional attachment with the

organization that makes it difficult to switch jobs. Meyer

and Allen ( 1997) also suggest that the results of a

48

positive relationship between tenure and organizational

commitment might be a simple reflection of the fact that

uncommitted employees or employees who have lesser job

involvement leave an organization and only those with high

involvement remain. Thus, the longer an employee stay with

the job the more hesitation he will transfer to another job

because of the fear he might not be employed. Thus, loyalty

with one’s job becomes the greatest hindrance of one’s

employement.

Conceptual Framework

The variable of primary interest to this research is

the dependent variable of organizational commitment. Two

main independent variables are used in an attempt to

explain the correlation in employees’ organizational

commitment. The first independent variable is Profile

Factor which includes gender, age, civil status, tenure of

service or work experience and education. The second

independent variable is Transformational Manager’s

Leadership Style which includes Idealized Influence,

49

Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual Stimulation,

Individualized Consideration, Contingent Reward, Management-

by-Exception, and Laissez-faire Leadership

Employees’ gender somewhat has an influence to

organizational commitment. Female employees are more likely

to be more committed as cited in earlier studies,

especially the married women who wants to help and sustain

their family needs. They also believe that they will find

difficulty to get another job because of their current

status. Single ladies are also more committed to the

organization because of the opportunities at stake to them

like promotion and advancement in their present position.

Male employees especially the married ones are expected to

have higher continuance commitment than the single one

because they serve as the breadwinner of the family and they

cannot take the risk of leaving the company because they

needed a job and a regular income. Gender differences may

affect their work because one’s capacity and work load given

them. In general men may be more involved in work that

requires their skills while women may get mor committed to

50

tasks where their capabilities, skills and strengths are

inclined for.

As with employees’ age, older employees tend to be more

likely committed as compared to younger employees. One of

the reasons is the limited opportunities of employment

outside so they tend to give their dedication, loyalty and

commitment to their current job where they wish to spend

their life until retirement. For instance in the

Philippines, pharma companies, especially the multinationals

do not accept applicants for medical representatives beyond

25 years of age, unlike in America where age discrimination

is prohibited. Thus a medrep aged 26 years and older is

expected to be more committed to the organization for fear

of losing his only source of income.

Employee’s length of service(Tenure) somewhat has an

influence to organizational commitment. The longer an

employee stays with the company, the more committed they are

with their employment because they tend to be more attached

with the place or their working environment and to their

fellow employees. Also, as the length of service in the

51

work increases, the level of continuance commitment to

their work likewise increases. The employee will no longer

think of quitting or transferring to another company because

of their loyalty. The value of loyalty will reflect in

their level of commitment to the company.

Married people have more family responsibilities

and need more stability and security in their jobs and

therefore, they are likely to be more committed to their

current organization than their unmarried counterparts.

Education also played a role in terms of the

level of organizational commitment of employees. Level of

education was expected to have a negative relationship with

organizational commitment. People with low levels of

educations generally have more difficulty changing jobs and

therefore show a greater commitment to their organizations.

Affective commitment can enhance job satisfaction

because employees agree with the organization’s objectives

and principles and because employees feel they are treated

fairly in terms of equity, and receive organizational care,

concern and support. The affectively committed employee

52

remains within the organization because it appeals to the

individual.

Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the Conceptual Framework

Hypotheses of the Study

Profile of Employees

● Age ● Gender ● Civil Status

Organizational

Commitment

● Affective Manager’s

Leadership

● Idealized Influence● Inspirational Motivation● Intellectual Stimulation

Independent Variable

Dependent Variable

53

In connection with the statement of the problem, here

are the five hypotheses developed:

Hypothesis 1: The level of transformational leadership of the manager is significantly related to the affective commitment of employee.

Hypothesis 2: The level of transformational leadership of the manager is significantly related to the continuance commitment of employee.

Hypothesis 3: The level of transformational leadership of the manager is significantly related to the normative commitment of employee.

Hypothesis 4: The profile of employee is significantly related to his affective commitment.

Hypothesis 5: The profile of employee is significantly related to his continuance commitment.

Hypothesis 6:The profile of employee is significantly related to his normative commitment.

Operational Definition of Variables

The definition of each variable is regardless on how

this study used it in terms of operation.

Affective Commitment refers to employees’

emotional attachment, identification with, and involvement

54

in the organization. Employees with strong affective

commitment stay with the organization because they want to.

Age. It refers to the chronological age of

employees measured in years.

Civil Status. This refers to whether the

respondent is single, married, widow, separated, or

annulled.

Contingent Reward shows the degree to which

managers’ tell subordinates what to do in order to be

rewarded, emphasize expectations, and recognize their

accomplishments.

Continuance Commitment refers to employees’

assessment of whether the cost of leaving the organization

are greater than the costs of staying. Employees who

perceive that the costs of leaving the organization are

greater than the costs of staying because the need to.

Education. This refers to the educational

attainment of the respondent

Gender. This refers to the respondents

regardless of their sex.

55

Idealized Influence indicates whether manager

holds subordinate’s trust, maintain their faith and

respect, show dedication to them, appeal to their hopes and

dreams, and act as their role model.

Individualized Consideration indicates the

degree to which managers show interest in subordinates’

well-being, assign projects individually, and pay attention

to those who seem less involved in the group.

Inspirational Motivation measures the degree to

which manager provides a vision, use appropriate symbols and

images to help subordinates focus on their work, and try to

make them feel their work is significant.

Intellectual Stimulation shows the degree to

which managers encourage subordinates to be creative in

looking at old problems in new ways, create an environment

that is tolerant of seemingly extreme positions, and nurture

people to question their own values and beliefs and those of

the organization.

56

Laissez-faire measures whether manager require

little of subordinates, are content to let things ride, and

let subordinates do their own thing.

Leadership is a process of interaction between

leaders and subordinates where a leader attempts to

influence the behaviour of his or her subordinates to

accomplish organizational goals.

Length of Service. The number of years served

by an employee in the company.

Management-by-exception assesses whether manager

tell subordinates the job requirements, are content with

standard performance, and are a believer in “if it anin’t

broke, don’t fix it.”

Normative Commitment refers to employees’

feelings of obligation to the organization. Employees with

high levels of normative commitment stay with the company

because they feel they ought to

Organizational Commitment. Measurement use to check the

level of employees’ commitment to the organization based on

57

three factors; affective, continuance and normative

commitment. (Meyer and Allen, 1984)

CHAPTER III

58

METHODS OF RESEARCH

The previous chapter reviewed the literature related to

leadership style and organizational commitment. This chapter

describes the research methodology used in this study to

test the hypothesis. The population, sample and the sampling

approach is also described. Furthermore, the two instruments

that were used in the research are described and their

applicability discussed. Moreover, research variables are

also identified. Finally, a brief description of the

relevant statistical techniques used in the research for the

collection and analysis of data is also provided.

Methods and Techniques of the Study

The method used in this research is quantitative

approach through descriptive correlation. The researcher

will be able to explain comprehensively the relationship

between the independent variables and the dependent

variable.

59

Descriptive correlation method is a method designed to

determine two or more variables associated with each other.

It is used to describe the present behavior or

characteristics of a particular population. The correlation

used was of Carl Pearson, a British Statistician who

explained the correlation between two variables and how it

reflects the degree to which the variables are related. The

said correlation ranges from +1 to -1. A correlation of +1

means that there is a perfect positive linear relationship

between variables. This means that given two variables: X

and Y, as Y increases, X likewise increases. O implies that

there is no linear correlation between the variables. And -

1 implies that if Y decreases, X increases or if Y

increases, X decreases.

Descriptive Correlation study is undertaken in order to

ascertain the characteristics of each variables under a

given situation and associate each independent variable to

the given dependent variable.

Population and Sample of the Study

60

The respondents of this study are medical

representatives from the different local, national and

multi-national pharmaceutical companies. The researcher

designed to have at least 100 respondents but only 60 were

able to complete and returned the questionnaire. The

respondents were given the questionnaire at random.

Due to time scarcity on the part of the researcher to

distribute and collect the questionnaires and on the part

of the respondents to completely answer the questionnaires,

the researcher made use of the convenience and quota survey

sampling methods. Convenient sampling is a nonprobability

method often used to get a gross estimate of the results,

without incurring the cost or time required to select a

random sample. Quota sampling survey is a nonprobability

method wherein the researcher first identifies the stratums

and their proportions as they are represented in the

population. The composition of the respondents were 60

medical represerntatives from different pharmaceutical

companies. They were chosen because they were available to

fill out the questionnaires while waiting for their turn to

61

cover the doctors. While outside the clinic waiting for the

doctors to be available for coverage, the secretary of the

doctor requested the respondents to participate in the

research by answering the questionnaire and submit the same

as soon as completed. The secretary explained that the

survey was for a mere school research, which has nothing to

do with their employment, and requested all respondents to

answer the questionnaires as truthfully as possible. There

was no time limit in answering the survey provided

respondents do not bring the questionnaires out or bring

them home. The doctors and their respective secretaries

involved thanked the respondents who participated the

research and assured them that whatever they put in the

questionnaires stays confidential. These whole process

went through as per instruction by the researcher, which

had become possible with the help and cooperation of the

doctors, good friends of the researcher, who allowed the use

of their clinics in the conduct of the survey.

Research Instrument

62

This research made use of survey questionnaires that

have three parts in which to be filled out by the

respondents.

Part I of the survey is a Multifactor

Leadership Questionnaire, also known as MLQ, which is the

benchmark measure of transformational leadership. MLQ

measures a broad range of leadership thypes from passive

leaders, to leaders who give contingent rewards to

followers, to leaders who transform their followers into

becoming leaders themselves. The MLQ identifies the

characterisitics of a transformational leader and helps

individuals discover how they measure up in their own eyes

and in the eyes of those with whom they work. The

Multifactor Leadership Questionaire measures leadership on

seven factors related to transformational leadership:

Factor 1. Idealized Influence indicates whether manager

holds subordinate’s trust, maintain their faith and

respect, show dedication to them, appeal to their hopes and

dreams, and act as their role model.

63

Factor 2. Inspirational Motivation measures the degree to

which manager provides a vision, use appropriate symbols and

images to help subordinates focus on their work, and try to

make them feel their work is significant.

Factor 3. Intellectual Stimulation shows the degree to which

managers encourage subordinates to be creative in looking at

old problems in new ways, create an environment that is

tolerant of seemingly extreme positions, and nurture people

to question their own values and beliefs and those of the

organization.

Factor 4. Individualized Consideration indicates the degree

to which managers show interest in subordinates’ well-being,

assign projects individually, and pay attention to those who

seem less involved in the group.

Factor 5. Contingent Reward shows the degree to which

managers’ tell subordinates what to do in order to be

rewarded, emphasize expectations, and recognize their

accomplishments.

Factor 6. Management-by-exception assesses whether manager

tell subordinates the job requirements, are content with

64

standard performance, and are a believer in “if it anin’t

broke, don’t fix it.”

Factor 7. Laissez-faire measures whether manager require

little of subordinates, are content to let things ride, and

let subordinates do their own thing.

The MLQ comprises a 5 point Likert scale and the respondents

were instructed during the administration of the

questionnaires by the researcher to mark the most suitable

answer. The scale ranges from 0 to 4 as follows:

0.00-0.49 - Not at all

0.50- 1.49 - Once in a while

1.50-2.49 - Sometimes

2.50-3.49 - Fairly often, and

3.50-4.00 - Frequently if not always

Each respondent was required to assess and

testify as to how frequently the behaviors described by each

of the statements are exhibited by their leader.

The second part of the survey questionnaire is

OCQ (Organizational Commitment Questionnaire). The OCQ

comprises a 5 point Likert scale and the respondent were

65

instructed during the administration of the questionnaires

by the researcher to mark the most suitable answer. The

Scales ranges from 0 to 4 as follows: 0 – Strongly Disagree,

1 – Disagree, 2 – Neutral, 3 – Agree, and 4 – Strongly

Agree. Scale items for measuring affective, normative, and

continuance commitment were selected for inclusion in the

scales based on the series of decision rules that took into

consideration item indorsement proportions, item

correlations, direction of scoring and content redundancy

(Allen & Meyer, 1990). In this study, the affective,

continuance and normative commitment of employees was

assessed through the administration of Bagraim’s (2004) 12

item adaptation of the multi-dimensional approach in

adaptation of the Meyer and Allen’s (1997) 12 items’ three

dimensional commitment measure. Examples of items from OCQ

include; a) affective commitment – “I feel like part of the

family at this organization”; b) continuance commitment –

“I would not leave this organization right now because of

what I would stand to lose”; and c) normative commitment –

66

“I would violate trust, if I quit my job with this

organization now”.

is the personal data of the respondents such age, gender,

salary, length of service and position. The last part is

taken from Kanungo’s ten scale questions of job involvement

which will measure the level of involvement of each

respondents to his work. This was developed by Kanungo in

1984 in order to measure the level of job involvement of an

employee within an organization. It was first tested among

157 New Zealand employees and the result was valid. This

job involvement questionnaire has 10 items to be answered by

the respondents, however, it has two negative phrase and

reverse score. Thus, this was done by assigning numeral

figure on the scale given : 1 is disagree, 2 is slightly

disagree, 3 is neither agree or disagree, 4 is slightly

agree and 5 is agree.

The Third survey questionnaire is a Demographic

Questions which concerns the respondents’ position and

personal information such as; age, gender, civil status,

length of service and level of education.

67

Collection and Gathering of Data

The researcher collect the questionnaires as per

completed and collected by the medical doctor’s secretary.

Two weeks after the researcher leave the sets of survey

forms to each doctors involved, he went back to the clinic

every week thereafter to start the collection of the filled

out questionnaires. It took two weeks to finish the

collection after which the researcher kept all the

questionnaires for tabulations. Out of 100 questionnaires

distributed only 60 were returned which is completely filled

out.

Processing and Statistical Treatment

Once the questionnaires had been completed, the

researcher then coded the responses in each questionnaire.

These scores were captured in a Microsoft EXCEL spreadsheet

for statistical analysis with respect to transformational

leadership, Organizational Commitment and Demographic

variables. The respondents were numbered R-01 to R-60.

68

Through the use of the system, the descriptive statistics

was made easier on the part of the researcher. These are:

1. Frequency count of the respondents as to the

gender, age, civil status, length of service and

level of education.

2. Frequency count to get the over-all mean of the

level of organizational commitment.

3. Frequency count to get the over-all mean of the

level of transformational leadership of managers.

4. Correlation between profile factors and the level of

organizational commitment of employees.

5. Correlation between the level of transformational

leadership of managers and the level of

organizational commitment of employees

This research made use of Pearson’s Correlation

Coefficient and used a two tailed test to scale and

analyze the result of the level of organizational commitment

of employees in relation to profile factors and and the

transformational leadership of managers: ** = highly

69

significant, .05 - .02 = significant, .01 - .000 = highly

significant and >.05 = not significant.

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DATA INTERPRETATION

This chapter presents the data analysis at the same

time to interpret each data which resulted from the

questionnaire that were disseminated from the samplings.

The data is organized according to Chapter 1 which will

establish more knowledge and comprehensive data

interpretation.

Findings are subdivided into three parts. The first

part discuss the personal data of employees whereas the

second part shows the level of job involvement of each

employees and the last part show the correlation of each

factor profile and job involvement.

Table 1 shows the distribution of employees

by their gender. Of the 60 respondents 43% are male

and 57% are female medical representatives. It reflects

that there were more female than male medreps who

70

participated in the survey but this figure does not stand to

indicate that there are more female than male medreps

working in the pharmaceutical industry in general. .

Table 1.1: Distribution of respondents by profile factors (N=60)

Profile Factors Frequency Percent   

Gender  Male 26 43%

Female 34 57%Total 60 100%     

Table 1.2 shows the distribution of respondents

by age. Employees under the age bracket of 20 – 24 gave the

highest percentile of 47% followed by an age ranged of 25-

29 which comprised 37%, while the least is from the age

bracket 40 – 44 which is at 3% only . The age bracket from

30 – 34 has 13 percentile, while the rest of age ranged

showe zero representation. The data clearly indicated that

medical representatives, in general, is composed of young

age group which pharma companies prefer because they are

more aggressive, less corrupted and being young, they are

easily trainable.

71

Table 1.3 shows the distribution of respondents

by marital status. This research showed single employees to

be dominant in the sales related industry like pharma as

they consisted 55% of the respondents while married medreps

represented 43% only. This result can be drawn from the fact

that medreps are employed to be assigned anywhere in the

Philippines. When their company assigns them or transfer

them to other areas determined by the company, medreps are

bound to accept the assignment. It’s normally a take it or

leave it policy, something which perhaps discouraged married

medreps to either apply as one.

Table 1.2: Distribution of respondents by profile factors (N=60)

Profile Factors Frequency Percent   

Age  50 and above 0 0%

45-49 0 0%40-44 2 3%35-39 0 0%30-34 8 13%25-29 22 37%20-24 28 47%

19 and below 0 0%Total 60 100%     

72

For married medreps who have already been with the company

and after awhile they will be reassigned to far areas they

will most likely refuse the reassignment and perhaps chose

to resign. On the otherhand, single medreps tend to accept

wherever they will be assigned or reassigned given that they

have no obligations as much as that of married ones.

Singles would even consider reassignments as a new challenge

and adventure as they have no children and partner to

consider.

Table 1.3: Distribution of respondents by profile factors (N=60)

Profile Factors Frequency Percent   

Civil Status  Single 33 55%Married 26 43%Widowed 1 2%Separated  Divorced  Total 60 100%     

Table 1.4 indicates that 80% of the total number

of the respondents were employed with their current

organization for 4 years and below, 17% were 5-9 years, and

only 3% were 10-14 years with the company. This could mean

73

fast turn over of employment among medreps in the pharma

industry.

Table 1.5 shows that almost all of the medreps surveyed

were bachelors degree holder which comprised 93% as against

those with some college or no degree which is only made up

of 7%. This goes to show that pharmaceutical companies are

particular with educational qualifications requiring most

applicants to be at least a graduate of a four year course

from any colleges or universities.

Table 1.4: Distribution of respondents by profile factors (N=60)

Profile Factors Frequency Percent   

Work Experience  30 and above  

25 - 29  20-24 0 0%

15 - 19 0 0%10 - 14 2 3%5 - 9 10 17%

4 and below 48 80%Total 60 100%     

Table 1.5: Distribution of respondents by profile factors (N=60)

74

Profile FactorsFrequenc

yPercent

   Level of Education  

Doctorate Degree or ProfessionalDegree

 

Some post-master's credit, nodegree

 

Masters Degree  Bachelors Degree 56 93%

Some college, No Degree 4 7%High School Graduate 0%

Total 60 100%     

Table 2.1 shows the mean of idealized

influence to be at 2.96 which means fairly often. This goes

to show that medreps graded the level of transformational

leadership of their managers in terms idealized influence

with a fairly often grade. This means that medreps feel good

being around with their managers, have complete faith and proud

to be associated with their managers. This also show that most

if not all of the managers of respondent medreps particed

idealized influence leadership.

Table 2.1 : Level of transformational leadership of managers (N=60)

Leadership Items Responses Mean Interpretation0 1 2 3 4

     Idealized Influence  

75

Makes me feel good when he/she is around. 22 26 12 2.83

FairlyOften

I have complete faith in him/her. 4 18 22 16 2.83FairlyOften

I am proud to be associated with him/her. 2 8 26 24 3.20

FairlyOften

  2.96fairlyOften

                 

Table 2.2 shows the level of transformational

leadership of managers in terms of inspirational motivation

at a mean value of 3.13 which is interpreted as ‘fairly

often. This means that supervisors fairly often expressed

with few simple words what their medreps could and should

do, provides appealing images about what their medreps can

do and helps medreps find meaning in their work.

Table 2.2 : Level of transformational leadership of managers (N=60)

Leadership Items Responses Mean Interpretation0 1 2 3 4

     Inspirational Motivation  

Expresses with a few simple words what I  

  could and should do. 2 2 838

10 2.87

FairlyOften

Provides appealing images about what I can do.

10

34

16 3.10

FairlyOften

Helps me find meaning in my work.16

26

24 3.43

FairlyOften

  3.13FairlyOften

                 

76

Table 2.3 shows the level of transformational

leadership of managers in terms of intellectual stimulation

at a mean value of 2.79 which is interpreted as fairly often.

This implies that supervisors fairly often enables medreps to

think about old problems in new ways, provides with new ways of

looking at puzzling things, and gets medreps to rethink ideas

that they never questioned before.

Table 2.3 : Level of transformational leadership of managers (N=60)

Leadership Items Responses Mean Interpretation0 1 2 3 4

     Intellectual Sitimulation  

Enables me to think about old problems in new  

  ways. 4 22 30 4 2.57FairlyOften

Provides me with new ways of looking at  

  puzzling things. 2 12 2818 3.00

FairlyOften

Gets me to rethink ideas that I never questioned  

  before. 2 2 14 3012 2.80

FairlyOften

  2.79FairlyOften

                 

Table 2.4 exhibits the level of

transformational leadership of managers in terms of

77

individualized consideration at a mean value of 3.01 or

fairly often. This means that supervisors fairly often

helped medreps to develop themselves, let medreps know how

he/she thinks they’re doing, and gave personal attention

when medreps felt rejected.

Table 2.4 : Level of transformational leadership of managers (N=60)

Leadership Items Responses Mean Interpretation0 1 2 3 4

     Individualized Consideration  

Helps me develop myself. 2 228

28 3.37

FairlyOften

Let me know how he/she thinks Iam doing. 2 4 12

34 8 2.70

FairlyOften

Gives personal attention to me when I seem

FairlyOften

  rejected. 2 1622

20 2.97

FairlyOften

  3.01FairlyOften

                 

Table 2.5 shows the level of transformational

leadership of managers in terms of contingent reward at a

mean value of 3.01 – fairly often. This implies that

supervisors fairly often told medreps what to do if they

want to be rewarded, provides rewards or recognition for

78

performers, and show what they could get for any

accomplishment.

Table 2.5 : Level of transformational leadership of managers (N=60)

Leadership Items Responses Mean Interpretation0 1 2 3 4

     Contingent Reward  

Tells me what to do if I want to be rewarded  

  for their work. 2 840

10 2.97

FairlyOften

Provides recognition/rewards when I reach  

  my goals. 2 1230

16 3.00

FairlyOften

Calls attention to what I can get for what I  

  accomplish. 2 1030

18 3.07

FairlyOften

  3.01FairlyOften

                 

Table 2.6 reflected the level of

transformational leadership of managers in terms of

management-by-exception at a mean value of 2.92 or fairly

often. This signifies that supervisors fairly often are

satisfied when medreps meet agreed standars, did not try to

change anything as long as things are working, and told

79

others the standards medreps have to know to carry out their

work.

Table 2.7 shows the level of transformational

leadership of managers in terms laissez-faire leadership at

a mean value of 2.53 which is interpreted as fairly often.

This means that supervisors fairly often contented to let

medreps continue working in the same as always, to allowed

medreps whatever they want to do, and asked nothing more

from medreps than what is absolutely essential.

Table 2.6 : Level of transformational leadership of managers (N=60)

Leadership Items Responses Mean Interpretation

0 1 2 3 4

   

  Management-by-exception  Satisfied when I meet agreed upon standards. 2

10 22 26 3.20

FairlyOften

As long as things are working,he/she do not  

  try to change anything.26

22 12 2.77

FairlyOften

Tells others the standards I have to know to  

80

  carry out my work. 216

34 8 2.80

FairlyOften

  2.92FairlyOften

                 Table 2.7 : Level of transformational leadership of managers (N=60)

Leadership Items Responses Mean Interpretation0 1 2 3 4

     Laissez-faire Leadership  

Is content to let me continue working in the  

  same ways as always. 410

24

12 2.40 Sometimes

Whatever I want to do is OK with him/her. 6

30

18 6 2.40 Sometimes

Ask no more of me than what is absolutely  

  essential.20

32 8 2.80

FairlyOften

  2.53FairlyOften

                 

Table 3 shows the level of organizational

commitment of employees in terms of affective commitment at

mean value of 2.78, normative commitment at 2.6 mean value,

and continuance commitment at 2.49 value.

In terms of the level of affective commitment

data revealed that employees have high commitment to their

81

organization as they felt like part of the family, as the

organization has a great deal of personal meaning to them

and as they are personally attached to their company. This

data supports previous study which argue that individuals

will develop emotional attachment to an organization when

they identify with the goals of the organization and are

willing to assist the organization in achieving these

goals. (Allen and Meyer, 1990)

In terms of the level of employees normative

commitment, medreps are highly committed. This means that

medreps will not leave the company due to any of the

following reasons: They didn’t feel it would be right to

leave the organization, they felt violating a trust if they

leave, they felt guilt if they would leave, and/or they felt

strong sense of obligation to stay. This relates to the

research of Randall and Cote (19991) which showed that when

employees start to feel that the organization has spent

either so much time and money developing and training them,

such employees might feel an obligation to stay with the

organization.

82

In terms of employees’ level of continuance

commitment, medreps are moderately committed. This goes to

show that they don’t leave the company for fear that it

might be more costly to leave than remain with the company

or because of what they stand to lose. The theory states

that as an individual remain in the employment of an

organization for longer period, they accumulate investments,

which become costly to lose. These investments include time,

job, effort, and organizational skills that might not be

transferrable (Beckers, 1990). This study shows that the

continuance commitment of medreps is only moderate which

could be attributed to the fact that majority of them (80%)

were young with the company (less than 4 years) which means

they have not yet accumulated investment with their company

which is costly to lose.

Table 3 : Organizational Commitment of Employees (N=60)

Commitment Items ResponsesMean Interpretation0 1 2 3 4

     Affective Commitment  

 I feel like part of the family ofthis organization. 2 10

28

20 3.10

HighCommitment

83

 This organization has a great deal of personal  

  meaning for me. 2 1634 8 2.77

HighCommitment

 I feel a strong sense of belonging to this  

  oragnization. 2 2430 4 2.60

HighCommitment

 I feel emotionally attached to this organization. 8 10

38 4 2.63

HighCommitment

  2.78High

Commitment     Normative Commitment  

 Even if were to my advantage, Idon't feel it  

 would be right to leave my organization. 2 6 20

22

10 2.53

HighCommitment

 I would violate a trust if I quitmy job with this  

  oraganization. 2 6 1832 2 2.43

ModerateCommitment

 I would feel guilty if I left my organization now.

10 12

32 6 2.57

HighCommitment

 I would not leave this organization right now  

 because I have a sense of obligation to the  

  people in it. 2028

12 2.87

HighCommitment

  2.60High

Commitment  Continuance Commitment  

 Too much of my life would be disrupted if I  

 decided that I wanted to leave this organization  

  now. 4 6 2224 4 2.30

ModerateCommitment

 I would not leave this organization right now  

 because of what I would stand to lose. 2 2 14

30

12 2.80

HighCommitment

 It would be very costly for me to leave this  

  organization right now. 2 4 2228 4 2.47

ModerateCommitment

84

 For me personally, the cost of leaving this  

 organization would be far greater than benefit. 4 2 24

26 4 2.40

ModerateCommitment

  2.49ModerateCommitment

                 

Table 4, on the correlation between

idealized influence and continuance commitment, is composed

of r = 0.252 which means low association, p = 0.020 which

means that the correlation of this variable is significant

and the decision has to reject the hypothesis. This study

shows that there is a significant positive low association

between the transformational leadership style of managers in

terms of idealized influence and their organizational

commitment in terms of continuance commitment. This goes to

show that the higher the idealized influence the higher the

continuance commitment and conversely the lower the

idealized influence the lower the continuance commitment.

Table 4, on the correlation between

inspirational motivation and continuance commitment, the

research revealed r = 0.520 which means substantial

association, p = 0.000 which is significant, and

85

decision= Reject Ho. Clearly indicated in this study that

there is a significant positive substantial association

between the transformational leadership style of managers in

terms of inspirational motivation and the organizational

commitment of employees in terms of continuance commitment.

This means that the higher the manager’s inspirational

motivation the higher the continuance commitment of

employees, likewise, the lower the inspirational motivation

the lower the continuance commitment.

Table 4, on the correlation between

intellectual stimulation and continuance commitment, the

research shows r = 0.180 which means negligible

association and p = >0.050 which means not significant and

therefore cannot reject the hypothesis. This goes to

elaborated that there is no significant association between

the level of transformational leadership of managers in

terms of intellectual stimulation and the organizational

commitment of medreps in terms of continuance commitment.

This means that no matter how high or low the intellectual

86

stimulation of the manager it will not have any effect as to

the level of continuance commitment of medreps.

Table 4: Correlation between the Level of Transformational Leadership Style of Managers,

Employees Profile Factors and Their Organizational Commitment in Terms of Continuance Commitment

Variables r p Decision

Idealized Influence 0.252 0.020 Reject Ho

Inspirational Motivation 0.520 0.000 Reject Ho

Intellectual Stimulation 0.180

>0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Individualized Consideration

0.294 0.020 Reject Ho

Contingent Reward 0.031

>0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Management-by-Exception 0.284 0.020 Reject Ho

Laissez-faire Leadership 0.263 0.020 Reject Ho

Age (0.30

0)(0.020) Reject Ho

Gender 0.097

>0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Civil Status 0.141

>0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Experience 0.176

>0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Education 0.320 0.010 Reject Ho

Table 4, on the correlation between

individualized consideration and continuance commitment,

87

shows r = 0.294 which means low association, p = 0.020

which means the correlation is significant, and

decision=Reject Ho. This study revealed that there is a

significant positive low association between the

transformational leadership style of managers in terms of

individualized consideration and the organizational

commitment of medreps in terms of continuance commitment.

This goes to highlight that the higher the individualized

consideration exercised by managers the higher the

continuance commitment of medreps and conversely the lower

the individualized consideration the lower the continuance

commitment.

Table 4, on the correlation between contingent

reward and continuance commitment, shows r = 0.180 which

is negligible association, p = >0.050 which means the

correlation is not significant, and the decision= Cannot

Reject the hypothesis. This implies that there is no

significant association between the level of

transformational leadership of managers in terms of

contingent reward and the organizational commitment of

88

employees in terms of continuance commitment. This means

that no matter how high or low the intellectual stimulation

of the manager it will not have any effect as to the level

of continuance commitment of employees.

Table 4, on the correlation between management-

by-exception and continuance commitment, shows r = 0.284

which means low association, p = 0.020 which means the

correlation of this variable is significant, and the

decision=Reject the hypothesis. Clearly the study

indicated that there is a significant positive low

association between the transformational leadership style of

managers in terms of management-by-exception and the

organizational commitment of medreps in terms of

continuance commitment. Further this goes to explain that

the higher the level of management-by-exception practiced by

managers the higher the employees’ level of continuance

commitment, and in likewise manner, the lower the level of

managers’ management-by-exception the lower the level of

employees’ continuance commitment.

89

Table 4, on the correlation between Laissez-

faire Leadership and continuance commitment, shows r =

0.263 which means low association and p = 0.020 which

means that the correlation of this variable is significant

and the decision is reject the hypothesis. Clearly the

study indicated that there is a significant positive low

association between the transformational leadership style of

managers in terms of Laissez-faire Leadership and the level

of medreps’ organizational commitment in terms of

continuance commitment. Further this goes to explain that

the higher the level of Laissez-faire Leadership used by

managers the higher the level of employees’ continuance

commitment and conversely the lower the level of Laissez-

faire Leadership the lower the continuance commitment.

Table 4, on the correlation between age and

continuance commitment, shows r=(0.300), p=(0.020) and

decision=Reject Ho.. This data shows that there is a

significant negative moderate association between the age of

medreps and their level of organizational commitment in

terms of continuance commitment. It means that the younger

90

the medreps the higher their level of continuance

commitment, and adversely the older the medreps the lower

the level of continuance commitment.

Table 4, on the correlation between gender and

continuance commitment, shows r=0.097 which means

negligible association, p=>0.050 which means the correlation

is not significant, and decision= Cannot Reject Hypothesis.

This goes to show that there is no significant positive

association between gender of medreps and their level of

continuance commitment. It means that being male or female

has negligible association with employee’s continuance

commitment.

Table 4, on the correlation between civil status

and continuance commitment shows r=0.141 - which means low

association, p=>0.050 - which means the correlation is not

significant, and decision=Cannot Reject Hypothesis. This

data shows that there is no significant positive low

association between the civil status of medreps their level

continuance commitment.

91

Table 4, on the correlation between experience

or tenure and continuance commitment, shows r=0.176 – which

means low association, p=>0.050 – which means the

correlation is not significant, and decision=Cannot Reject

Ho. This data illustrates that there is no significant

correlation between the number of years medreps stay with

the company and their level of continuance commitment.

Table 4, on the correlation between education

and continuance commitment, shows r=0.320 – moderate

association, p=0.010 – the correlation is significant, and

decision=Reject Hypothesis. This study shows that there is

significant positive moderate association between the level

of educational attainment of medreps and their level of

continuance commitment. It indicates that the higher the

educational attainment of medreps the higher their level of

continuance commitment in the same manner that when the

educational level of employees is lower the lower is their

continuance commitment.

Table 5: Correlation between the Level of Transformational Leadership Style of

92

Managers, Employees Profile Factors and Their Organizational Commitment in Terms of Normative Commitment

Variables r p Decision

Idealized Influence 0.285 0.020 Reject Ho

Inspirational Motivation 0.406 0.000 Reject Ho

Intellectual Stimulation 0.117 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho

Individualized Consideration 0.306 0.020 Reject Ho

Contingent Reward (0.030)

>(0.050) Cannot Reject Ho

Management-by-Exception 0.321 0.010 Reject Ho

Laissez-faire Leadership 0.005 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho

Age (0.247)

>(0.050) Cannot Reject Ho

Gender 0.058 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho

Civil Status 0.162 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho

Experience 0.191 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho

Education 0.163 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho

Table 5, on the correlation between idealized

influence and normative commitment, shows r=0.285, p=0.020,

and decision=reject hypothesis. This data data revealed that

there is a significant positive low association between the

level of transformational leadership style of managers in

terms of idealized influence and their organizational

93

commitment in term of normative commitment. This means that

the higher the level of idealized influence managers has on

their subordinates the higher the employees level of

normative commitment. Likewise, the lower the idealized

influence of managers the lower the level of normative

commitment of employees.

Table 5, on the correlation between

inspirational motivation and normative commitment, shows

r=0.406, p=0.000, and decision= reject hypothesis. This

research shows that there is a significant positive moderate

association between the transformational leadership of

managers in terms of inspirational motivation and

employees’ organizational commitment in terms of normative

commitment. This goes to illustrate that the higher the

level of inspirational motivation applied by managers the

higher the level of employees’ normative commitment.

Conversely, the lower the level of inspirational motivation

used by managers, the lower the normative commitment level

of employees.

94

Table 5, on the correlation between intellectual

stimulation and normative commitment, shows r=0.117,

p=>0.050, and decision=cannot reject hypothesis. This

demonstrates that there is no significant association

between the level of transformational leadership of managers

in terms of intellectual stimulation and the level of

organizational commitment of employees in terms of normative

commitment.

Table 5, on the correlation between idealized

consideration and normative commitment, shows r=0.306,

p=0.020, and decision=reject Ho. It is reflected in this

research that there is significant positive moderate

association between the level of transformational leadership

style of managers in terms of individualized consideration

and the level of employees’ organizational commitment in

terms of normative commitment. This means that the higher

the level of individualized consideration employed by

managers the higher the level of employees’ normative

commitment will become. In the same way that when the level

95

of individualized consideration of managers is low the level

of employees’ normative commitment is also low.

Table 5, on the correlation between contingent

reward and normative commitment, shows r=(0.030),

p=>(0.050), and decision=cannot reject Ho. This figure shows

that there is no significant negative association between

the level of transformational leadership style of managers

in terms of contingent reward and the level of

organizational commitment of employees in terms of

normative commitment. It means that regardless of the

degree to which managers tell subordinates what to do in

order to be rewarded, emphasize expectations and recognize

their accomplishments, employees feeling of obligation to

stay with the organization will neither increase nor

decrease.

Table 5, on the correlation between management-

by-exception and normative commitment, shows r=0.321,

p=0.010, and decision=reject Ho. This item signifies that

there is significant positive moderate association between

the level of transformational leadership style of managers

96

in terms of management-by-exception and the level of

employees’ organizational commitment in tems of normative

commitment. This means that the higher the level of

management-by-exception exercised by managers in the

workplace it is reciprocated with higher level of

normative commitment by the employees. In retrospect, the

lower the level of manager’s exercise of management-by-

exception the lower the level of employees’ normative

commitment.

Table 5, on the correlation between laissez-

faire and normative commitment, shows r=0.005, p=>0.0.50,

and decision=cannot reject Ho. This study enunciates that

there is no significant positive association between the

level of transformational leadership style of managers in

terms of laissez-faire and the level of organizational

commitment of employees in terms of normative commitment.

This means that whether managers require little of their

subordinates, are content to let things ride, and let

subordinates do their own thing, subordinates’ level of

97

normative commitment to stay with the company is not

influenced or affected.

Table 5, on the correlation between age and

normative commitment, shows r=(0.247), p=>(0.050), and

decision=Cannot Reject Ho. The figure in this data shows

that there is no significant negative association between

the age and the level of organizational commitment of

medreps in terms of normative commitment. It means that

younger and older medreps are the same in terms of their

level of normative commitment to stay with the company

because they feel they ought to.

Table 5, on the correlation between gender and

normative commitment, shows r=0.058, p=>0.050, and

decision=Cannot Reject Ho. This part of the research

indicates that there is no significant positive association

between employees’ gender and their level of organizational

commitment in terms of normative commitment. It means that

whether the employee medrep is male or female, it won’t have

any significant effect in the level of which they feel

obligated to remain with the organization.

98

Table 5, on the correlation between civil status

and normative commitment, shows r=0.162, p=>0.050, and

decision=Cannot Reject Ho. This study effectuates that there

is no significant positive association between the civil

status of employees and the level of their organizational

commitment in terms of normative commitment. It means that

employees level of obligation to stick with the organization

is not associated with whether they are single or married.

Table 5, on the correlation between work

experience or tenure and normative commitment, shows

r=0.191, p=>0.050, and decision=Cannot Reject Ho. This

study shows that there is no significant positive low

association between the number of years of employees’

working experience and their level of organizational

commitment in terms of normative commitment. It means that

no matter how long employees been with the company do not

signify their level of normative commitment to stay with

the organization because they feel obligated to do so.

Table 5, on the correlation between education

and normative commitment, shows r=0.163, p=>0.050, and

99

decision=Cannot Reject Ho. The figure as shown in the this

table signifies that there is no significant positive low

association between the level of education of employees and

their level of organizational commitment in terms of

normative commitment. This goes to show that the educational

attainment of an employee does not have any influence in

his/her decision to either stay or leave the company on the

premise of his/her feelings of obligation to stay.

Table 6: Correlation between the Level of Transformational Leadership Style of Managers,

Employees Profile Factors and Their Organizational Commitment in Terms of Affective Commitment

Variables r p Decision

Idealized Influence 0.309 0.010 Reject Ho

Inspirational Motivation 0.531 0.000 Reject Ho

Intellectual Stimulation 0.147 >0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Individualized Consideration

0.354 0.005 Reject Ho

Contingent Reward 0.021 >0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Management-by-Exception 0.349 0.005 Reject Ho

Laissez-faire Leadership 0.103 >0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Age (0.030

>(0.050)

Cannot RejectHo

100

)

Gender 0.176 >0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Civil Status 0.197 >0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Experience 0.392 0.001 Reject Ho

Education 0.182 >0.050

Cannot RejectHo

Table 6, on the correlation between idealized

influence and affective commitment, shows r=0.309 – moderate

association, p=0.010 – significant correlation, and the

decision=Reject Ho. The data shows that there is a

significant positive moderate association between the level

of transformational leadership of managers in terms of

idealized influence and the level of organizational

commitment of medreps in terms of affective commitment.

This simply indicates that the higher the level of managers’

idealized influence the higher the medreps level of

affective commitment. Adversely, the lower the level of

managers’ idealized influence the lower the level of

affective commitment.

Table 6, on the correlation between

inspirational motivation and affective commitment, shows

101

r=0.531 – substantial association, p=0.000 – significant

correlation, and the decision=Reject Ho. The data shows that

there is a significant positive substantial association

between the level of transformational leadership of managers

in terms of inspirational motivation and the level of

organizational commitment of medreps in terms of affective

commitment. This simply indicates that the higher the level

of managers’ inspirational motivation the higher the

medreps’ level of affective commitment. Adversely, the lower

the level of managers’ inspirational motivation the lower

the level of affective commitment.

Table 6, on the correlation between intellectual

stimulation and affective commitment, shows r=0.147 – low

association, p=>0.050 – not significant correlation, and

decision=Cannot Reject Ho. This study determines that there

is no significant positive low association between the level

of transformational leadership style of managers in terms of

intellectual stimulation and the level of organizational

commitment of medreps in terms of affective commitment.

102

Table 6, on the correlation between

individualized consideration and affective commitment,

shows r=0.354 – moderate association, p=0.005 – significant

correlation, and the decision=Reject Ho. The data shows that

there is a significant positive substantial association

between the level of transformational leadership of

managers’ in terms of individualized consideration and the

level of organizational commitment of medreps in terms of

affective commitment. This means that the higher the level

of managers’ individualized consideration the higher the

medreps’ level of affective commitment. Adversely, the lower

the level of managers’ individualized consideration the

lower the level of affective commitment.

Table 6, on the correlation between contingent

reward and affective commitment, shows r=0.021 – negligible

association, p=>0.050 – not significant correlation, and

decision=Cannot Reject Ho. This study determines that there

is no significant positive negligible association between

the level of transformational leadership style of managers

in terms of contingent reward and the level of

103

organizational commitment of medreps in terms of affective

commitment.

Table 6, on the correlation between management-

by-exception and affective commitment, shows r=0.349 –

moderate association, p=0.005 – significant correlation,

and the decision=Reject Ho. The data shows that there is a

significant positive substantial association between the

level of transformational leadership of managers in terms of

management-by-exception and the level of organizational

commitment of medreps in terms of affective commitment.

This shows that the higher the level of managers’

management-by-exception the higher the medreps’ level of

affective commitment. Adversely, the lower the level of

managers’ management-by exception the lower the level of

affective commitment.

Table 6, on the correlation between Laissez-

faire leadership and affective commitment, shows r=0.103 –

low association, p=>0.050 – not significant correlation, and

decision=Cannot Reject Ho. This study shows that there is no

significant positive low association between the level of

104

transformational leadership style of managers in terms of

laissez-faire leadership style and the level of

organizational commitment of medreps in terms of affective

commitment.

Table 6, on the correlation between age and

affective commitment, shows r=(0.030) – negligible

association, p=>(0.050) not significant correlation, and

decision=Cannot Reject Ho. The figure in this data shows

that there is no significant negative negligible association

between the age and the level of organizational

commitment of medreps in terms of affective commitment. It

means that younger and older medreps are the same in terms

of their level of affective commitment to stay with the

company because they feel they ought to.

Table 6, on the correlation between gender and

affective commitment, shows r=0.176 – low association,

p=>0.050 – no significant correlation, and decision=Cannot

Reject Ho. This part of the research indicates that there is

no significant positive low association between employees’

gender and their level of organizational commitment in terms

105

of affective commitment. It means that whether the

employee medrep is male or female, it won’t have any

significant effect in the level of which they feel obligated

to remain with the organization.

Table 6, on the correlation between civil status

and affective commitment, shows r=0.197 – low association,

p=>0.050 – no significant association, and decision=Cannot

Reject Ho. This study effectuates that there is no

significant positive association between the civil status of

employees and the level of their organizational commitment

in terms of affective commitment. It means that employees

level of obligation to stick with the organization is not

associated with whether they are single or married.

Table 6, on the correlation between work

experience or tenure and afective commitment, shows r=0.392

– moderate association, p=0.001 – significant correlation,

and decision=Reject Ho. This study shows that there is

significant positive moderate association between the number

of years of employees’ working experience and their level of

organizational commitment in terms of affective commitment.

106

It means that the longer the medrep’s employment the higher

their level of organizational commitment in terms of

affective commitment. On the other hand, the shorter the

medreps’ employment the lower their level of affective

commitment.

Table 6, on the correlation between education

and affective commitment, shows r=0.182 – low association,

p=>0.050 – no significant association, and decision=Cannot

Reject Ho. The figure as shown in the this table signifies

that there is no significant positive low association

between the level of education of employees and their level

of organizational commitment in terms of affective

commitment. This goes to show that the educational

attainment of an employee does not have any influence in

his/her decision to either stay or leave the company on the

premise of his/her feelings of obligation to stay.

107

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary

This chapter contains the overview of the research. It

gives a brief statement of the problem, the procedures and

findings.

108

This researched was designed to measure the

correlation between the level of transformational leadership

style of managers, the profile factor, and the level of

organizational commitment of medical reprsentatives from

different pharmaceutical companies. There were two

independent variables used and one dependent variable. The

first independent variable used is the personal profile of

the respondents which covers age, gender, civil status,

tenure and education. The second independent variable used

is transformational leadership which covers idealized

influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual

stimulation, individualized consideration, contingency

reward, management-by-exception and laissez-faire

leadership. The dependent variable being used was

organizational commitment which covers continuance

commitment, affective commitment and normative commitment.

Only 60 of the 100 suvery questionnaires were completed,

collected and tabulated.

After the data has been tabulated the researcher made

use of Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient and used a two

109

tailed test to scale and analyze the result of the level

of organizational commitment of employees in relation to

profile factors and the transformational leadership of

managers.

Conclusion

Based on the analysis of data, the following

conclusions have been derived:

1. The level of transformational leadership of

managers in terms of idealized commitment,

inspirational motivation, individualized

consideration and management-by-exception are

significantly related to the affective commitment of

medreps

2. The level of transformational leadership of

managers in terms of intellectual stimulation,

contingent reward and laissez-faire leadership are

not significantly related to the affective

commitment of the medreps.

110

3. The level of transformational leadership of

managers in terms of idealized commitment,

inspirational motivation, individualized

consideration and management-by-exception are

significantly related to the normative commitment of

medreps.

4. The level of transformational leadership of

managers in terms of intellectual stimulation,

contingent reward and laissez-faire leadership are

not significantly related to the normative

commitment of the medreps.

5. The level of transformational leadership of

managers in terms of idealized commitment,

inspirational motivation, individualized

consideration, management-by-exception and laissez-

faire leadership are significantly related to the

continuance commitment of medreps.

6. The level of transformational leadership of managers

in terms of intellectual stimulation and contigent

111

reward are not significantly related to the

continuance commitment of the medreps.

7. Age is not significantly associated with the level

of organizational commitment of medreps in terms of

affective and normative commitment but data shows

that there is significant negative moderate

association between age and continuance

commitment.

8. Gender is not significantly related with the level

of organizational commitment of medreps, therefore,

hypothesis cannot be rejected.

9. Civil status is not significantly associated with

the level of organizational commitment of medreps,

therefore hypothesis cannot be rejected.

10. Experience or tenure is not significantly

associated with the level of organizational

commitment of medreps in terms of normative

commitment and continuance commitment, however, in

terms of affective commitment it is significantly

associated.

112

11. Educational level is significantly associated with

the level of organizational commitment of medreps in

terms of continuance commitment. In terms of

normative commitment and affective commitment data

shows that there is no significant association.

Recommendation

Based on the findings and conclusions of the study, the

following recommendation is given:

Recommendation for Practice

1. There should be more regular trainings conducted on

managers and supervisors of pharmaceutical companies

about transformational leadership so they will learn

how to exercise idealized influence, inspirational

motivation and individualized consideration among

their medreps. The recommended training is a must to

113

improve and maintain high level of organizational

commitment of the medreps

2. Pharma companies should device schemes or programs

that would attract medreps to stay longer with the

organization, and not be lured to transfer to other

companies, because as they remain longer they

would accumulate investment in terms of time, job,

effort and skills which they might feel costly to

lose. The longer they are with the company the

higher continuance commitment they will have on the

organization as shown in this research.

3. The management should not discriminate in the hiring

and retaining of medical reprsentatives on the basis

of their gender and civil status as this two

profile factors do not have significant relation

with the level of organizational commitment of the

medreps as shown in this research.

Recommendation for future study

114

From the findings of the study, some

recommendations for future research

include:

1. A study on some profile factors not included in

the independent variables like religion, sexual

preference and whether or not the respondent is the

bread winner of the family. It should stimulate

interest for companies to know whether there is a

significant relation between straight, gays,

lesbians, catholic or bread winner and their level

of organizational commitment.

2. More study on on the correlation between

Transformational leadership and organizational

commitment with larger number of respondents, to

be able to concretize what has been analyzed and

concluded in this study.

3. A study on the effect of the level of

organizational commitment to the actual performance

of employees, especially those in sales, to check

if their level of sales performance at work is

115

significantly associated with their level of

organizational commitment in terms of affective,

normative and continuance commitment.

4. A research on the correlation between the

different leadership style in terms of

transformational, transactional, situational

leadership, etc. and the level of sales performance

of salesmen or sales people, either from pharma of

from other industries.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Retrieved Nov. 26, 2011, http://www.crlsresearchguide.org/

Retrieved Nov. 28, 2011, http://www.experiment-resources.com/defining-a-research problem.html#ixzz1dH2zs9GT

Retrieved Nov. 29, 2011,http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_characteristics_of_a_good_research#ixzz1dHB9SZWS

Retrieved Nov. 29, 2001 http://www.strategies-for-managing-change.com/

116

transformational-leadership-theory.html

Retrieved Dec. 2, 2011,http://www.essortment.com/all/leadershipstyle_rrnq.htm

Retrieved Dec. 15, 2011,http://www.essortment.com/all/leadershipstyle_rrnq.htm

Retrieved Dec. 15, 2001,http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/company-structures-ownership/16367337-1.html#ixzz1iTK7Ls4Q

Retrieved Dec. 15, 2011, http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/company-structures-ownership/16367337-1.html#ixzz1iTKCtJMX

Retrieved Dec. 15, 2011, http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/company-structures-ownership/16367337-1.html#ixzz1iTKIowhi

Retrieved Dec. 28, 2011,http://gsbejournal.au.edu/4V/Journals/4.pdf

Retrieved Dec. 28, 2011,http://gsbejournal.au.edu/4V/Journals/4.pdf

Retrieved December 28, 2011,http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-04072003-224349/unrestricted/BarbaraBrown-4-22-03.pdf

Retrieved January 29, 2012,http://www.eurojournals.com/ejss_6_4_13.pdf

Retrieved January 29, 2012, http://www.ipedr.com/vol7/10-D00030.pdf

Retrieved January 29, 2012,http://www.ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_18_October_2011/31.pdf

117

Retrieved Jan. 29, 2012, http://www.ifrnd.org/JEBS/Vol%203/3%282%29%20Aug%202011/9.pdf

Retrieved Jan. 30,2012http://poli.haifa.ac.il/~acohen/docs/12.pdf

Retrieve Jan. 30, 2012,http://poli.haifa.ac.il/~acohen/docs/12.pdf

Retrieved Jan. 30, 2012,http://poli.haifa.ac.il/~acohen/docs/12.pdf

Retrieved January 30, 2012, http://applyhrm.asp.radford.edu/Volume%2011/MS%2011_1_%20Chughtai%20%28pages%2039-64%29.pdf

Retrieved Feb. 1, 2012,http://hsmr.rsmjournals.com/content/21/4/211.abstract

Retrieved Feb. 1, 2012, http://unllib.unl.edu/LPP/tella2.htm

Retrieved Feb. 1, 2012,http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-32298-1310/unrestricted/DISSERTATION.PDF

Retrieved Feb. 1, 2012,http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1870780&show=pdf

Retrieved Feb. 1, 2012,

http://irssm.upnyk.ac.id/userfiles/file/papers/043.pdf

Retrieved Feb. 1, 2012, http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/T-Anth/Anth-10-0-000-08-Web/Anth-10-1-000-08-Abst-PDF/Anth-10-1-031-08-418-Salami-S-O/Anth-10-1-031-08-418-Salami-S-O-Tt.pdf

118

Retrieved Feb. 1, 2012, http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/26927/

Allen NJ, Meyer JP (1990). The measurement and variablesassociated with affective, continuance and normativecommitment to the organization. J. Occup. Psychol. 63: 1–18.

Allen NJ, Meyer JP (1996). Affective, continuance andnormative commitment to the organization: An examination ofconstruct validity. J. Vocat. Behav. 49: 252-276.

Arnold KA, Barling K, Kelloway EK (2001). Transformationalleadership or the iron cage: Which predicts trust,commitment and team efficacy? Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 22:315-320.

Bass BM (1985). Leadership and performance beyondexpectations. Free Press: New York.

Bass BM, Avolio BJ (1994). Improving organizationaleffectiveness through transformational leadership.California: Sage.

Bass BM, Steidlmeier P (1999). Ethics, character andauthentic transformational leadership behavior. TheLeadersh. Q. 10: 181-217.

Basu R, Green SG (1997). Leader-member exchange andtransformational leadership: An empirical examination ofinnovative behaviours in leader-member dyads. J. Appl. Soc.Psychol. 27: 477-99.

Dansereau F, Graen G, Haga W (1975). A vertical dyadapproach to leadership within formal organizations. Org.Behav. Hum. Perform. 13: 46-78.

Deluga RJ (1992). The relationship of leader-member exchangewith laissez faire, transactional, transformationalleadership in naval environments. In Clark KE, Clark MB,

119

Campbell DP (Eds), Impact of Leadership, Centre of CreativeLeadership, Greensboro, NC pp.237-47.

Meyer and Allen's (1991). three-component model oforganizational commitment. J. Psychol. pp. 15-23.

Hayward Q, Goss M, Tolmay R (2004). The relationship betweentransformational and transactional leadership and employeecommitment. Grahamstown: Rhodes University, Business Report.

Iverson RD, Buttigieg DN (1998). Affective, Normative andContinuance Commitment: Can the ‘Right Kind’ of commitmentbe managed? Department of Management, University ofMelbourne.Kent A, Chelladurai P (2001). Perceived transformationalleadership, organizational commitment and citizenshipbehavior: A case study in intercollegiate athletics. J.Sport Manage. 15(2): 135-159.

Lowe K, Kroeck KG, Sivasubrahmanian N (1996). Effectivecorrelates of transformational and transactional leadership:A meta-analytic review. Leadersh. Q. 7: 385-425.

Mathieu JE, Zajac DM (1990). A review and meta-analysis ofthe antecedents, correlates and consequences oforganizational commitment. Psychol. Bulletin 108: 171-194.

Murphy SM, Wayne SJ, Liden RC, transformational leadership:Change for whom? Res. in Org. Change Dev. 8: 123-143.

120

Questionnaire for Employees

Part I: Manager’s Leadership

Directions: below are items on leadership. Kindly asses theLeadership of your immediate supervisor or manager in yourown work unit by encircling the appropriate number using thescale below:

0 = Not at all1 = Once in a while2 = Sometimes3 = Fairly often4 = Frequently, if not always

1. Makes me feel good when he/she is around.

0 1 2 3 4

2. Express with a few simple words what I could and should

do. 0 1 2 3 4

3. Enables me to think about old problems in new ways.

0 1 2 3 4

4. Helps me develop myself.

0 1 2 3 4

5. Tells me what to do if I want to be rewarded for their

work. 0 1 2 3 4

6. Satisfied when I meet agreed upon standards.

0 1 2 3 4

7. Is content to let me continue working in the same way as

always. 0 1 2 3 4

121

8. I have complete faith in him/her.

0 1 2 3 4

9. Provides appealing images about what I can do.

0 1 2 3 4

10. Provides me with new ways of looking at puzzling

things. 0 1 2 3 4

11. Let me know how he/she thinks I am doing.

0 1 2 3 4

12. Provides recognition/rewards when I reach my goals.

0 1 2 3 4

13. As long as things are working, he/she do not try to

change anything. 0 1 2 3 4

14. Whatever I want to do I OK with him/her.

0 1 2 3 4

15. I am proud to be associated with him/her.

0 1 2 3 4

16. Helps me find meaning in my work.

0 1 2 3 4

17. Gets me to rethink ideas that never questioned before.

0 1 2 3 4

18. Gives personal attention to me when I seem rejected.

0 1 2 3 4

19. Calls attention to what I can get for what I

accomplish. 0 1 2 3 4

20. Tells others the standards I have to know to carry out

my work. 0 1 2 3 4

122

21. Asks no more of me than what is absolutely essential.

0 1 2 3 4

Part II: Organizational Commitment

Directions: Below are items on organizational commitment. Kindly assess your organizational commitment by encircling the appropriate number using the scale below:

0 = Strongly disagree1 = Disagree2 = Neutral3 = Agree4 = Strongly agree

1. I feel part of the family at this organization.0 1 2 3 4

2. Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided that I wantedto leave this organization now.

0 1 2 3 4

3. I would not leave this organization right now because of what I Would stand to lose. 0 12 3 4

4. This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me. 0 1 2 3 4

5. It would be very costly for me to leave this organizationright now. 0 1 2 3 4

6. For me personally, the cost of leaving this organization would befar greater than benefit.

0 1 2 3 4

123

7. Even if were to my advantage, I don’t feel it would be right to leavemy organization now. 0 12 3 4

8. I would violate a trust if I quit my job with this organization. 0 1 2 3 4

9. I feel a strong sense of belonging to this organization.0 1 2 3 4

10. I feel emotionally attached to this organization.0 1 2 3 4

11. I would feel guilty if I left my organization now0 1 2 3 4

12. I would not leave this organization right now because I have asense of obligation to the people in it.

0 1 2 3 4

Part III: Demographic Questions

The following questions concern your position and personal information.

1. What is your age? __________

2. What is your Gender? Male

124

Female

3. What is your Civil Status? Single Married Widowed Separated Divorced

4. What is your job title?______________________________________________________________

5. How long have you worked for your immediate supervisor ormanager?_____________ Years ____________ Months

6. What is your highest level of education? High School Graduate Some College, No Degree Bachelor’s Degree Some master’s credit, no degree Masters Degree Some post-master’s credit, no degree Doctorate Degree or Professional Degree

7. What is your monthly salary?_____________________________________________________________

125

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Questionnaire #

II(1,8,15)

IM(2,9,16)

IS(3,10,17)

IC(4,11,18)

CR(5,12,19)

ME(6,13,20)

LL(7,14,21)

1 2.33

3.00

3.00

2.67

3.00

3.33

1.67

2 4.00

4.00

2.67

3.00

3.67

3.33

3.00

3 2.33

2.33

2.00

3.00

3.67

2.00

2.00

4 1.67

2.33

1.00

1.00

2.67

2.00

2.00

5 3.67

3.33

3.33

3.33

3.67

3.00

2.00

6 3.67

3.33

3.67

3.33

3.67

3.00

2.00

7 3.67

3.00

3.33

2.67

2.33

2.67

3.00

8 1.67

2.33

2.33

2.33

3.00

2.00

3.67

9 2.33

3.00

2.33

3.00

3.00

3.33

2.33

10 3.67

3.33

3.00

3.33

3.00

3.33

2.67

11 2.00

3.33

3.33

3.00

3.00

3.33

3.33

12 3.33

3.00

2.67

2.67

2.00

2.33

2.67

13 3.33

3.67

3.00

3.00

3.33

2.67

2.67

14 2.67

2.33

2.67

3.67

3.00

3.00

3.33

15 3.00

3.00

2.67

2.33

2.33

2.00

3.00

16 2.67

2.67

3.00

3.33

2.67

3.00

2.67

17 3.33

3.67

3.00

3.67

3.67

3.00

2.33

18 3.00

3.00

3.00

3.67

2.67

3.33

2.67

19 3.00

3.33

2.33

2.67

3.33

2.67

2.67

20 3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.33

3.00

2.67

21 3.00

3.00

3.33

3.67

3.00

3.67

3.00

126

22 2.33

3.00

1.67

3.33

1.33

2.67

2.00

23 3.67

3.67

3.00

3.67

4.00

3.33

3.00

24 3.33

2.67

3.67

3.33

3.67

3.33

2.67

25 2.67

3.00

2.67

3.33

3.00

3.33

3.33

26 3.33

2.00

3.33

3.33

3.00

2.00

2.00

27 2.00

2.00

2.33

1.33

2.33

2.33

1.33

28 3.67

3.67

3.67

4.00

3.33

4.00

3.33

Legend:II - Idealized InfluenceIM - Inspirational MotivationIS - Intellectual StimulationIC - Individualize ConsiderationCR - Contingent RewardME - Management-by-exceptionLL - Laissez-Fair Leadership

(Continued) TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Questionnaire #

II(1,8,15)

IM(2,9,16)

IS(3,10,1

7)

IC(4,11,1

8)

CR(5,12,19)

ME(6,13,2

0)

LL(7,14,21)

29 3.00

3.33

2.00

2.67

3.00

3.00

2.33

30 4.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

2.67

3.33

3.00

31 2.33

3.00

3.00

2.67

3.00

3.33

1.67

32 4.00

4.00

2.67

3.00

3.67

3.33

3.00

33 2.33

2.33

2.00

3.00

3.67

2.00

2.00

34 1.67

2.33

1.00

1.00

2.67

2.00

2.00

127

35 3.67

3.33

3.33

3.33

3.67

3.00

2.00

36 3.67

3.33

3.67

3.33

3.67

3.00

2.00

37 3.67

3.00

3.33

2.67

2.33

2.67

3.00

38 1.67

2.33

2.33

2.33

3.00

2.00

3.67

39 2.33

3.00

2.33

3.00

3.00

3.33

2.33

40 3.67

3.33

3.00

3.33

3.00

3.33

2.67

41 2.00

3.33

3.33

3.00

3.00

3.33

3.33

42 3.33

3.00

2.67

2.67

2.00

2.33

2.67

43 3.33

3.67

3.00

3.00

3.33

2.67

2.67

44 2.67

2.33

2.67

3.67

3.00

3.00

3.33

45 3.00

3.00

2.67

2.33

2.33

2.00

3.00

46 2.67

2.67

3.00

3.33

2.67

3.00

2.67

47 3.33

3.67

3.00

3.67

3.67

3.00

2.33

48 3.00

3.00

3.00

3.67

2.67

3.33

2.67

49 3.00

3.33

2.33

2.67

3.33

2.67

2.67

50 3.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

3.33

3.00

2.67

51 3.00

3.00

3.33

3.67

3.00

3.67

3.00

52 2.33

3.00

1.67

3.33

1.33

2.67

2.00

53 3.67

3.67

3.00

3.67

4.00

3.33

3.00

54 3.33

2.67

3.67

3.33

3.67

3.33

2.67

55 2.67

3.00

2.67

3.33

3.00

3.33

3.33

56 3.33

2.00

3.33

3.33

3.00

2.00

2.00

57 2.00

2.00

2.33

1.33

2.33

2.33

1.33

128

58 3.67

3.67

3.67

4.00

3.33

4.00

3.33

59 3.00

3.33

2.00

2.67

3.00

3.00

2.33

60 4.00

3.00

3.00

3.00

2.67

3.33

3.00

  2.98

3.01

2.80

3.01

3.01

2.91

2.61

Organizational Commitment

Questionnaire #

AC(1,4,9,

10)

NC(7,8,11,12)

CC(2,3,5,

6)

1 3.25

3.00

3.00

2 2.00

2.00

2.25

3 3.25

2.75

1.50

4 2.00

1.75

1.75

5 3.25

3.50

3.25

6 3.25

3.50

3.25

7 4.00

4.00

4.00

8 2.00

2.25

3.00

9 2.50

2.50

2.75

10 3.00

2.50

2.75

11 2.75

2.50

2.25

12 2.75

2.75

2.00

13 3.25

3.00

3.25

14

129

3.00 2.25 2.50

15 2.75

1.25

2.50

16 2.50

3.00

2.75

17 3.50

3.00

3.25

18 3.00

3.00

3.00

19 2.75

2.25

2.75

20 2.75

2.50

2.50

21 3.25

3.00

3.25

22 3.25

3.25

2.75

23 3.25

3.00

3.50

24 1.75

1.25

0.50

25 2.50

2.75

2.75

26 1.00

1.25

1.25

27 1.75

1.50

1.25

28 3.25

2.25

2.25

29 3.50

3.75

2.50

30 3.25

3.75

2.75

31 3.25

3.00

3.00

32 2.00

2.00

2.25

33 3.25

2.75

1.50

(Continued) Organizational Commitment

130

Questionnaire #

AC(1,4,9,10)

NC(7,8,11,

12)

CC(2,3,5,6

)

34 2.00

1.75

1.75

35 3.25

3.50

3.25

36 3.25

3.50

3.25

37 4.00

4.00

4.00

38 2.00

2.25

3.00

39 2.50

2.50

2.75

40 3.00

2.50

2.75

41 2.75

2.50

2.25

42 2.75

2.75

2.00

43 3.25

3.00

3.25

44 3.00

2.25

2.50

45 2.75

1.25

2.50

46 2.50

3.00

2.75

47 3.50

3.00

3.25

48 3.00

3.00

3.00

49 2.75

2.25

2.75

50 2.75

2.50

2.50

51 3.25

3.00

3.25

52 3.25

3.25

2.75

53 3.25

3.00

3.50

54 1.75

1.25

0.50

55

131

2.50 2.75 2.75

56 1.00

1.25

1.25

57 1.75

1.50

1.25

58 3.25

2.25

2.25

59 3.50

3.75

2.50

60 3.25

3.75

2.75

  2.81

2.63

2.57

Legend: AC - Affective CommitmentNC - Normative CommitmentCC - Continuance Commitment

Personal Profile Questionna

ire # AGE GENDER CIVILSTATUS

WORKEXPERIENCE EDUCATION

1 23 1 1 4.3 32 24 2 1 2 33 40 1 2 12 24 27 1 2 0.3 35 24 1 2 3 36 24 1 1 5 37 30 1 3 6 38 24 1 1 0.5 39 24 1 1 2 310 27 2 1 4 311 30 1 1 3 112 24 1 2 0.8 313 25 2 1 3.5 314 26 2 2 3.11 315 33 2 2 7 316 22 2 1 1.2 3

132

17 26 2 2 4 318 25 1 2 8.4 319 22 1 1 1.4 320 24 2 2 2.11 321 28 2 2 8.2 322 23 2 1 1.1 323 21 2 1 0.1 324 24 2 1 1.3 325 25 1 2 4.5 326 31 1 2 1 227 27 1 1 1.8 328 25 1 1 0.8 329 23 2 1 1.8 330 24 2 2 0.9 331 23 1 1 4.3 332 24 2 1 2 3

(Continued) Personal Profile

Questionnaire # AGE GENDER

CIVILSTATUS

WORKEXPERIENCE EDUCATION

33 40 1 2 12 234 27 1 2 0.3 335 24 1 2 3 336 24 1 1 5 337 30 1 3 6 338 24 1 1 0.5 339 24 1 1 2 340 27 2 1 4 341 30 1 1 3 142 24 1 2 0.8 343 25 2 1 3.5 344 26 2 2 3.11 345 33 2 2 7 3

133

46 22 2 1 1.2 347 26 2 2 4 348 25 1 2 8.4 349 22 1 1 1.4 350 24 2 2 2.11 351 28 2 2 8.2 352 23 2 1 1.1 353 21 2 1 0.1 354 24 2 1 1.3 355 25 1 2 4.5 356 31 1 2 1 257 27 1 1 1.8 358 25 1 1 0.8 359 23 2 1 1.8 360 24 2 2 0.9 3           

  25.83

1.47

1.50

3.17

2.87

Legend: Gender

Female 1 Male 2Civil Status Single 1 Married 2Education Some College 2 Bachelor Degree 3

134

ALVIN L. TUBOGBlk. 19 Lot 17, Unit 3, Mahogany St., Green Plains Subd.,

Calumpit, Bulacan, PHILIPPINES

135

+630448962471/ +639193390876 / +639238319349 tubog_alvin@yahoo.com mpcdocs.alvin@gmail.com

http://www.lynnmedcorp.com

SUMMARY

Result oriented and dependable professional with over 20 years ofoutstanding track record in sales and marketing as a MedicalRepresentative, Operation Manager, Business Development Manager,and President, of different pharmaceutical companies. Aconsistent achiever, and an innovator of various unique marketingstrategies, generating higher revenues and profits at minimalresources. Passionate for continues learning and development.

CORE COMPETENCIES

Proven entrepreneurial leadership and management talent Outstanding negotiation, presentation and training skills Excellent Market segmentation and analysis skills Outstanding Human Resource Development skills Efficient quantitative and qualitative analysis skills Excellent effective written and oral communication skills

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

President - Lynnmed Corporation (2008 – present)

Distributor of exclusive ethical pharma products like a thirdgeneration cephalosporin (cefixime) and cox2 selective(celecoxib) with other common molecules.

Functions and Accomplishments:

Registration, documentation, licensing and organization ofthe corporation.

136

Negotiation with various importers, traders, andmanufacturers for product exclusivity.

Hiring, training and staffing of office and field workers. Developing, contracting and training of sub-distributors

with their respective Sales Force. Installation of depot partners, entrep partners and a break-

even profit sharing scheme program to increase corporatesales at minimized marketing cost and enhance profitability.

Product Pricing and positioning (setting of transfer priceand suggested commercial price)

Creation of policies on sales, collections, credits and HR Increasing corporate net assets by more than 200% in two

years of operation.

Business Development Manager – Limmer Phil. Inc (2005-2008)

A subsidiary company of Axcess Pharma Inc., organized to market in the Philippines an ETO sterilized hospital sets of Limmer Thailand like Infakit for infants, circumsets used for circumcision and many others.

Functions and Accomplishments:

Creation of Independent Business Unit or Distributors per region nationwide

Conducted regular product and marketing skills development training for medical representatives, product specialists and managers in the Philippines and Thailand

Deployment and continuous developmental trainings for field personnel

Part-time College Professor - University of Southern Philippines (2004-2005)

Subjects : International Business and Entrepreneurship

Sales & Operation Manager – Asvins Healthcare Distribution (2002-2005)

137

Exclusive Distributor of co-amoxiclav, cefaclor, and other products within region 7 and 8, with a total of 14 workforce.

Functions and Accomplishment:

Managed, Strategized, controlled, and institutionalized theentire business operation.

Architectured significant measures which minimized if nottotally prevent cheating in the workplace and keep everyworker highly competitive and motivated.

Medical Representative – Novartis Healthcare (1996 - 2002)

A Large Multinational Pharmaceutical Company

Functions and Accomplishments:

Conducted regular Round Table Discussions among group ofspecialized doctors and product symposiums to provideupdates and new treatment approach to different diseasedfranchise.

Administered territorial competitive analysis by constantlymonitoring and evaluating competitors products, activities,performance and strategies, and on the basis thereof createdour own defensive and offensive plan of actions.

Detailing Champion, Highest MD Call Award, ProductExcellence Award with trip to Hongkong.

Territory Manager - Vendiz International Inc. (1993 - 1996)

A National Pharmaceutical Company manufacturing and marketing common generic-branded medicines like Amoxicillin, Cefalexin, Ampicillin, etc.

Functions an Accomplishments:

Established and maintained long term business relations withcustomers by following up promptly with any problems andresolved customers concerns through effective communicationand interpersonal skills.

Second Highest Annual Sales Performer of the year for twoyears, 1993 & 1994.

138

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Masters in Counseling Units - Cebu Normal University, Cebu City

Law-Completed 3 years – Don Vicente Orestes Romualdez Education

MBA Units – Ateneo De Davao University AB Economics – Republic Central Colleges

I hereby certify that the

above information is correct.

ALVIN L. TUBOG