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 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
 2

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 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

independently. Thus, the commitment of competent employees is critical to the success of

the organization.
 3

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

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

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 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 and their supervisors. Furthermore, this
 5

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 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
 6

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 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 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

 7

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 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.

 8

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

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]

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
 9

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:

 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 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.
 10

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.

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 allowed
 11

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 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
 12

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, 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 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
 13

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 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

 14

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 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 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.
 15

 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.

 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
 16

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 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

 17

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), 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

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,

 18

& 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 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
 19

achieving desired goals (Antonakis, Avolio, & Sivasurbramaniam, 2003; Bass & Riggio,

2006).

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 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
 20

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 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 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
 21

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 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).

 22

Continuance commitment refers to commitment based on the costs that the

employee associates with leaving the organization [due to the high cost of leaving].

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

(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).

 23

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 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 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
 24

(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 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.

 25

(Arnold, Barling and Kelloway, 2001) This implies that the leaders who give advices,

supports, and pay attention to the individual needs 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 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
 26

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.

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.

 27

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 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). 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
 28

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. 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.

 29

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 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

 30

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, 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 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
 31

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 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 remains within the organization because it appeals to the

individual.
 32

Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the Conceptual Framework

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Profile of Employees

● Age
● Gender
● Civil Status
● Work Experience
● Education Organizational
Commitment

● Affective
Manager’s Leadership ● Normative
● Idealized Influence ● Continuance
● Inspirational Motivation
● Intellectual Stimulation
● Individualized
Consideration
● Contingent Reward
● Management-by-Exception
● Laissez-faire Leadership

Hypotheses of the Study

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.
 33

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 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.

 34

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.

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.”

 35

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 three factors; affective,

continuance and normative commitment. (Meyer and Allen, 1984)

 36

CHAPTER III

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.

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
 37

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

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 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

 38

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

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:

 39

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.

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 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.
 40

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

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)
 41

continuance commitment – “I would not leave this organization right now because of

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

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.

 42

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

and >.05 = not significant.

 43

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 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%
 44

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.

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%
 45

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 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.

 46

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)

Profile Factors Frequency Percent

Level of Education
Doctorate Degree or Professional Degree
Some post-master's credit, no degree
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)

 47

Responses
Leadership Items Mean Interpretation
0 1 2 3 4

Idealized Influence
Makes me feel good when he/she is around. 22 26 12 2.83 Fairly Often
I have complete faith in him/her. 4 18 22 16 2.83 Fairly Often
I am proud to be associated with him/her. 2 8 26 24 3.20 Fairly Often
2.96 fairly Often

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)

Responses
Leadership Items Mean Interpretation
0 1 2 3 4

Inspirational Motivation
Expresses with a few simple words what I
could and should do. 2 2 8 38 10 2.87 Fairly Often
Provides appealing images about what I can do. 10 34 16 3.10 Fairly Often
Helps me find meaning in my work. 16 26 24 3.43 Fairly Often
3.13 Fairly Often

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,
 48

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)

Responses
Leadership Items Mean Interpretation
0 1 2 3 4

Intellectual Sitimulation
Enables me to think about old problems in new
ways. 4 22 30 4 2.57 Fairly Often
Provides me with new ways of looking at
puzzling things. 2 12 28 18 3.00 Fairly Often
Gets me to rethink ideas that I never questioned
before. 2 2 14 30 12 2.80 Fairly Often
2.79 Fairly Often

Table 2.4 exhibits the level of transformational leadership of managers in terms

of 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)

Responses
Leadership Items Mean Interpretation
0 1 2 3 4

Individualized Consideration
Helps me develop myself. 2 2 28 28 3.37 Fairly Often
Let me know how he/she thinks I am doing. 2 4 12 34 8 2.70 Fairly Often
Gives personal attention to me when I seem Fairly Often
rejected. 2 16 22 20 2.97 Fairly Often
3.01 Fairly Often
 49

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 performers, and show what they could get for any accomplishment.

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

Responses
Leadership Items Mean Interpretation
0 1 2 3 4

Contingent Reward
Tells me what to do if I want to be rewarded
for their work. 2 8 40 10 2.97 Fairly Often
Provides recognition/rewards when I reach
my goals. 2 12 30 16 3.00 Fairly Often
Calls attention to what I can get for what I
accomplish. 2 10 30 18 3.07 Fairly Often
3.01 Fairly Often

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 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.

 50

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

Responses
Leadership Items Mean Interpretation
0 1 2 3 4

Management-by-exception
Satisfied when I meet agreed upon
standards. 2 10 22 26 3.20 Fairly Often

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

try to change anything. 26 22 12 2.77 Fairly Often

Tells others the standards I have to know to

carry out my work. 2 16 34 8 2.80 Fairly Often

2.92 Fairly Often

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

Responses
Leadership Items Mean Interpretation
0 1 2 3 4

Laissez-faire Leadership
Is content to let me continue working in the
same ways as always. 4 10 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 Fairly Often
2.53 Fairly Often
 51

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 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.

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
 52

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)

Responses
Commitment Items
0 1 2 3 4 Mean Interpretation

Affective Commitment
I feel like part of the family of this organization. 2 10 28 20 3.10 High Commitment
This organization has a great deal of personal
meaning for me. 2 16 34 8 2.77 High Commitment
I feel a strong sense of belonging to this
oragnization. 2 24 30 4 2.60 High Commitment
I feel emotionally attached to this organization. 8 10 38 4 2.63 High Commitment
2.78 High Commitment

Normative Commitment
Even if were to my advantage, I don't feel it
would be right to leave my organization. 2 6 20 22 10 2.53 High Commitment
I would violate a trust if I quit my job with this
Moderate
oraganization. 2 6 18 32 2 2.43 Commitment
I would feel guilty if I left my organization now. 10 12 32 6 2.57 High Commitment
I would not leave this organization right now
because I have a sense of obligation to the
people in it. 20 28 12 2.87 High Commitment
2.60 High Commitment
Continuance Commitment
Too much of my life would be disrupted if I
decided that I wanted to leave this organization
Moderate
now. 4 6 22 24 4 2.30 Commitment
I would not leave this organization right now
because of what I would stand to lose. 2 2 14 30 12 2.80 High Commitment
It would be very costly for me to leave this
Moderate
organization right now. 2 4 22 28 4 2.47 Commitment
For me personally, the cost of leaving this
organization would be far greater than 4 2 24 26 4 2.40 Moderate
 53

benefit. Commitment
Moderate
2.49 Commitment

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 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

 54

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 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 Reject Ho
Individualized Consideration 0.294 0.020 Reject Ho
Contingent Reward 0.031 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho
Management-by-Exception 0.284 0.020 Reject Ho
Laissez-faire Leadership 0.263 0.020 Reject Ho
Age (0.300) (0.020) Reject Ho
Gender 0.097 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho
Civil Status 0.141 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho
Experience 0.176 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho
Education 0.320 0.010 Reject Ho

Table 4, on the correlation between individualized consideration and continuance

commitment, 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

 55

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 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.

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
 56

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 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
 57

no significant positive low association between the civil status of medreps their level

continuance commitment.

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 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
 58

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 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.

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.

 59

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

employees’ organizational commitment in tems of normative commitment. This means

 60

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 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

 61

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 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 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.

 62

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 Reject Ho
Individualized Consideration 0.354 0.005 Reject Ho
Contingent Reward 0.021 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho
Management-by-Exception 0.349 0.005 Reject Ho
Laissez-faire Leadership 0.103 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho
Age (0.030) >(0.050) Cannot Reject Ho
Gender 0.176 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho
Civil Status 0.197 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho
Experience 0.392 0.001 Reject Ho
Education 0.182 >0.050 Cannot Reject Ho

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 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

 63

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.

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
 64

negligible association between the level of transformational leadership style of managers

in terms of contingent reward and the level of 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 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

 65

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 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. 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.

 66

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.
 67

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.

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 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.

 68

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.

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.

 69

6. The level of transformational leadership of managers in terms of intellectual

stimulation and contigent 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.

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.
 70

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 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.

 71

Recommendation for future study

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 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.
 72

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/

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

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

Aug%202011/9.pdf

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

 73

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

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

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

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

Arnold KA, Barling K, Kelloway EK (2001). Transformational leadership or the iron

cage: Which predicts trust, commitment and team efficacy? Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 22:
315-320.

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

Bass BM, Avolio BJ (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through

transformational leadership. California: Sage.

Bass BM, Steidlmeier P (1999). Ethics, character and authentic transformational

leadership behavior. The Leadersh. Q. 10: 181-217.
 74

Basu R, Green SG (1997). Leader-member exchange and transformational leadership: An

empirical examination of innovative behaviours in leader-member dyads. J. Appl. Soc.
Psychol. 27: 477-99.

Dansereau F, Graen G, Haga W (1975). A vertical dyad approach to leadership within

formal organizations. Org. Behav. Hum. Perform. 13: 46-78.

Deluga RJ (1992). The relationship of leader-member exchange with laissez faire,

transactional, transformational leadership in naval environments. In Clark KE, Clark MB,
Campbell DP (Eds), Impact of Leadership, Centre of Creative Leadership, Greensboro,
NC pp.237-47.

Meyer and Allen's (1991). three-component model of organizational commitment. J.

Psychol. pp. 15-23.

Hayward Q, Goss M, Tolmay R (2004). The relationship between transformational and

transactional leadership and employee commitment. Grahamstown: Rhodes University,
Business Report.

Iverson RD, Buttigieg DN (1998). Affective, Normative and Continuance Commitment:

Can the ‘Right Kind’ of commitment be managed? Department of Management,
University of Melbourne.
Kent A, Chelladurai P (2001). Perceived transformational leadership, organizational
commitment and citizenship behavior: A case study in intercollegiate athletics. J. Sport
Manage. 15(2): 135-159.

Lowe K, Kroeck KG, Sivasubrahmanian N (1996). Effective correlates of

transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review. Leadersh. Q. 7:
385-425.

Mathieu JE, Zajac DM (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates
and consequences of organizational 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.
 75

Questionnaire for Employees

Part I: Manager’s Leadership

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

0 = Not at all
1 = Once in a while
2 = Sometimes
3 = Fairly often
4 = 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
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
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 disagree
1 = Disagree
2 = Neutral
 76

3 = Agree
4 = 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 wanted

to 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 1 2 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 organization right now. 0 1 2 3 4

6. For me personally, the cost of leaving this organization would be

far greater than benefit. 0 1 2 3 4

7. Even if were to my advantage, I don’t feel it would be right to leave

my organization now. 0 1 2 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 now 0 1 2 3 4

12. I would not leave this organization right now because I have a
sense 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
 77

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 or manager?
_____________ 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?

_____________________________________________________________

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Questionnaire II IM IS IC CR ME LL
# (1,8,15) (2,9,16) (3,10,17) (4,11,18) (5,12,19) (6,13,20) (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
 78

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
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
 79

Legend: II - Idealized Influence

IM - Inspirational Motivation
IS - Intellectual Stimulation
IC - Individualize Consideration
CR - Contingent Reward
ME - Management-by-exception
LL - Laissez-Fair Leadership
 80

(Continued) TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Questionnaire II IM IS IC CR ME LL
# (1,8,15) (2,9,16) (3,10,17) (4,11,18) (5,12,19) (6,13,20) (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
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
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

 81

Organizational Commitment

AC NC CC
Questionnaire # (1,4,9,10) (7,8,11,12) (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 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
 82

(Continued) Organizational Commitment

AC NC CC
Questionnaire # (1,4,9,10) (7,8,11,12) (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 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 Commitment

NC - Normative Commitment
CC - Continuance Commitment

Personal Profile
 83

CIVIL WORK
Questionnaire # AGE GENDER EDUCATION
STATUS EXPERIENCE
1 23 1 1 4.3 3
2 24 2 1 2 3
3 40 1 2 12 2
4 27 1 2 0.3 3
5 24 1 2 3 3
6 24 1 1 5 3
7 30 1 3 6 3
8 24 1 1 0.5 3
9 24 1 1 2 3
10 27 2 1 4 3
11 30 1 1 3 1
12 24 1 2 0.8 3
13 25 2 1 3.5 3
14 26 2 2 3.11 3
15 33 2 2 7 3
16 22 2 1 1.2 3
17 26 2 2 4 3
18 25 1 2 8.4 3
19 22 1 1 1.4 3
20 24 2 2 2.11 3
21 28 2 2 8.2 3
22 23 2 1 1.1 3
23 21 2 1 0.1 3
24 24 2 1 1.3 3
25 25 1 2 4.5 3
26 31 1 2 1 2
27 27 1 1 1.8 3
28 25 1 1 0.8 3
29 23 2 1 1.8 3
30 24 2 2 0.9 3
31 23 1 1 4.3 3
32 24 2 1 2 3

(Continued) Personal Profile

 84

Questionnaire CIVIL WORK

# AGE GENDER STATUS EXPERIENCE EDUCATION
33 40 1 2 12 2
34 27 1 2 0.3 3
35 24 1 2 3 3
36 24 1 1 5 3
37 30 1 3 6 3
38 24 1 1 0.5 3
39 24 1 1 2 3
40 27 2 1 4 3
41 30 1 1 3 1
42 24 1 2 0.8 3
43 25 2 1 3.5 3
44 26 2 2 3.11 3
45 33 2 2 7 3
46 22 2 1 1.2 3
47 26 2 2 4 3
48 25 1 2 8.4 3
49 22 1 1 1.4 3
50 24 2 2 2.11 3
51 28 2 2 8.2 3
52 23 2 1 1.1 3
53 21 2 1 0.1 3
54 24 2 1 1.3 3
55 25 1 2 4.5 3
56 31 1 2 1 2
57 27 1 1 1.8 3
58 25 1 1 0.8 3
59 23 2 1 1.8 3
60 24 2 2 0.9 3

25.8
3 1.47 1.50 3.17 2.87

Legend: Gender
Female 1
Male 2
Civil Status
 85

Single 1
Married 2
Education
Some College 2
Bachelor
Degree 3

ALVIN L. TUBOG
Blk. 19 Lot 17, Unit 3, Mahogany St., Green Plains Subd.,
 86

Calumpit, Bulacan, PHILIPPINES

+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 of outstanding track record in
sales and marketing as a Medical Representative, Operation Manager, Business Development
Manager, and President, of different pharmaceutical companies. A consistent achiever, and an
innovator of various unique marketing strategies, generating higher revenues and profits at
minimal resources. 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 third generation cephalosporin (cefixime)
and cox2 selective (celecoxib) with other common molecules.

Functions and Accomplishments:

 Registration, documentation, licensing and organization of the corporation.

 Negotiation with various importers, traders, and manufacturers 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 corporate sales at minimized marketing cost and enhance
profitability.
 Product Pricing and positioning (setting of transfer price and suggested commercial
price)
 Creation of policies on sales, collections, credits and HR
 87

 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)

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 the entire business operation.

 Architectured significant measures which minimized if not totally prevent cheating in the
workplace and keep every worker 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 of specialized doctors and
product symposiums to provide updates and new treatment approach to different diseased
franchise.
 Administered territorial competitive analysis by constantly monitoring and evaluating
competitors products, activities, performance and strategies, and on the basis thereof
created our own defensive and offensive plan of actions.
 Detailing Champion, Highest MD Call Award, Product Excellence Award with trip to
Hongkong.

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

 88

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 with customers by following up
promptly with any problems and resolved customers concerns through effective
communication and interpersonal skills.
 Second Highest Annual Sales Performer of the year for two years, 1993 & 1994.

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