




































Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research 

 Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

ISSN 2687-850X   E-ISSN 2687-8518  

Published by CRIBFB, USA 

 

14 

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB STRESS AND 

WORKPLACE DEVIANT BEHAVIORS: A STUDY ON BANK 

EMPLOYEES IN BANGLADESH 
 

 

Sabrin Sultana 

Undergraduate Student 

Banking & Insurance Department 

University of Chittagong, Bangladesh 

E-mail: sabrinsultana1060@gmail.com 

 

Athkia Subat 

Undergraduate Student 

Banking & Insurance Department 

University of Chittagong, Bangladesh 

E-mail: subat.athkia@gmail.com 

 

Md. Nasim Bhuiyan 

Undergraduate Student 

Banking & Insurance Department 

University of Chittagong, Bangladesh 

E-mail: knasim938@gmail.com 

  

 ABSTRACT 

Despite the increasing number of studies on the relationship between job satisfaction and 

deviant behaviors in the workplace, still there is a lack of studies where job satisfaction has been 

measured considering stress and job engagement and also whether all of these three variables 

are directly correlated with workplace deviant behaviors or not. This study aims to investigate 

the relationship between job satisfaction and workplace deviant behaviors and other important 

objectives is the relationship between job satisfaction, stress, and job engagement with 

workplace deviant behaviors and the relationship between stress and job engagement with job 

satisfaction. Our study found that stress is liable for less satisfied employees which produces a 

high level of involvement in workplace deviant behaviors. On the other hand, job engagement 

creates job satisfaction which reduces workplace deviant behaviors. The quantitative approach 

is employed on 82 employees of private and public commercial banks. Based on PLS-SEM 

method conceptual frameworks were constructed, descriptive analysis and regression analysis 

were used. Our study concluded that there is a strong causal relationship between job stress, job 

engagement with job satisfaction which results in workplace deviant behavior. Therefore, 

workplace deviant behavior can be reduced if organizations take some recreational activities 

that will increase job engagement. 

 

Keywords: Job Satisfaction, Workplace Deviant Behavior (WDB), Job Engagement, Stress, 

Bank Employees in Bangladesh. 

mailto:sabrinsultana1060@gmail.com
mailto:subat.athkia@gmail.com


https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

15 

INTRODUCTION 

Is job dissatisfaction liable for creating workplace deviant behaviors (WDB) in the organization? 

Stress and low job engagement are accountable for lower job satisfaction and higher WDB. We 

also measured job stress and job engagement of employees to find out whether these two 

variables influence job satisfaction and WDB. The output of an organization largely depends on 

the employees. So, if authority can ensure employees’ satisfaction and also can ensure that 

employees’ are not engage in deviant behaviors within the workplace, organization would receive 

greater benefit in the long-run. (Bennett & Robinson, 2000) has defined workplace deviance as 

voluntary behavior which violates various organizational norms and also threatens the well-being 

of employees or the organization. This type of behaviors such as aggression, theft, violence and 

absenteeism, etc. can be controlled by the various norms of organization (Feldman, 1984). 

According to Lawrence & Robinson (2007) job satisfaction is very important because it has 

power and impact on both turnover and absenteeism. Job dissatisfaction has a link to workplace 

deviant behaviors. This linkage has been showed in a similar way by (Bowling, 2010). 

Employees tend to exhibit deviant behaviors with the purpose of releasing their emotional 

tensions when they are dissatisfied (Srivastava, 2012). From the previous studies, it can be said 

that employees who are dissatisfied may engage in workplace deviant behaviors such as sabotage 

of equipment, poor services and many destructive rumors. Bakker et al. (2002) defined the term 

engagement as a fulfilling, positive and work-related state of mind which is characterized by 

absorption, dedication and vigor. 

 Saks (2006) defined that job engagement can be related to job satisfaction positively. 

According to Appelbaum et al. (2005) a large number of profit loss and damaging atmosphere in 

the organization are responsible for workplace deviant behaviors. Job stress is an emotional 

experience which is related with anxiety, strain, and tenseness and this originates from a job 

(Cooke & Rousseau, 1984). Job stress and workplace deviant behaviors had a positive 

relationship and that result found after conducting a study on 162 employees in a public 

organization in Malaysia. (Omar et al., 2011). This study also revealed that employees who 

experienced irritation and frustration because of work related stress were more prone to involve in 

deviant behaviors at the organization. Spector & Fox (2005) defined that job stress and many 

other factors are accountable for deviant workplace behaviors. Some deviance behaviors are low 

productivity, absenteeism, low job motivation and alcoholism etc (Safaria et al., 2010). According 

to (Baum et al., 1981) stress is a kind of process in which different environmental forces or 

events, it can be termed as stressors, threaten an organism’s existence as well as well-being.  

This paper has been structured with abstract, keywords, problem statement, objective, 

literature review, methodology, result and findings, conclusion and future research direction. In 

Bangladesh, no study has been occurred on the relationship between job satisfaction and 

workplace deviant behaviors of bank employees considering stress and job engagement. 

Therefore, our objective is to showcase the relationship between job satisfaction and workplace 

deviant behaviors. 

OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH 

 Exhibiting the relationship between workplace deviant behaviors and job satisfaction is 

the core objective of our study. In addition, some other objectives are: 

 To show whether stress of the bank employees decreases job satisfaction and increases 

WDB in the organization or not. 

 To exhibit whether job engagement increases satisfaction of the employees and reduces 

WDB in the organization or not. 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

16 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

The main purpose of the chapter is to present a resume of conceptual frame work relating to 

application of regression analysis for deviant behaviors of employees of private and public banks 

in Bangladesh. Past studies gives way to future research endeavor. An acquaintance with earlier 

pertinent studies was felt necessary for better understanding of the research problem and to 

develop appropriate research methodology. The relevant studies and their findings are limited. 

However, an attempt is made to orient much on the theoretical views of different 

authors/scientists on the subject and closely related results are reported. Keeping in view the 

subject of the study, the review of the available literature related to the study are presented under 

the following discussion. 

Job satisfaction can be defined as a person’s feeling of satisfaction on his or her job, most 

importantly, it acts as a motivation to work. But job satisfaction is not the self-satisfaction or 

self-contentment, rather it is the satisfaction on the job. Job satisfaction eliminates various types 

of deviant behaviors, an intentional desire to cause harm to an organization, such as absenteeism, 

theft, acting rudely to co-workers etc. Stress negatively effects on deviant behaviors, whereas job 

engagement reduces deviant behaviors. Job engagement refers to the extent to which an 

employee feel very passionate about their jobs, specially they are committed to work, and put 

maximum effort into their tasks. 

 Greenberg and Scott (1996) investigated employee theft as a major form of 

organizational misbehavior. They claimed that these phenomenon are certainly universal and 

thus it is assumed that most members of the organizations engage in some form of misbehavior 

related to their jobs. 

 Mitchell and Ambrose (2007) carried out a research to examine the relationship between 

abusive supervision and employee workplace deviance using the moderating effects of negative 

reciprocity beliefs. They hypothesized that negative reciprocity will moderate the relationship 

between abusive supervision and employee deviance; also abusive supervision will be strongly 

associated to supervisor-directed deviance when employees believe in negative reciprocity. They 

found that abusive supervision is positively and significantly related to each type of deviance. 

Further, negative reciprocity beliefs were significantly and positively related to all types of 

deviance. They concluded that employees with negative reciprocity beliefs consider revenge an 

appropriate response to negative treatment. 

A study carried out by Chen and Spector (1992) included measures of role ambiguity, 

role conflict, interpersonal conflict and workload along with organizational constraints in 

relation to work place deviance. They showed a support for the link between stress and deviance. 

They also examined work stressors, aggression, theft and substance abuse. The result showed all 

of them were correlated significantly with hostility and all but workload were correlated 

significantly with aggression and sabotage. 

A meta-analysis of 57 empirical studies regarding workplace aggression’s antecedents 

was conducted by Hershcovis et al. (2007). Findings of the studies showed certain predictors of 

deviant behavior in the workplace. Specially, interpersonal conflict was highlighted as a predictor 

of deviance. Deviance was found to be a method coping with workplace stressors. The results of 

this research indicated that the strongest predictors of deviant behavior in the workplace were 

interpersonal conflict and situational constraints. 

 Mount et al. (2006) posits that individual-related factors (i.e. agreeableness and 

conscientiousness) are related to workplace deviant behavior through the mediating effect of job 

satisfaction. In terms of practice, the results of this study add to the body of knowledge on 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

17 

workplace deviant behavior from the Malaysian public service context and HRD practices. 

Workplace deviant behavior may be regarded as a negative reciprocity orientation where 

an individual returns a negative treatment with a negative treatment (Mitchell & Ambrose, 2007).  

Lawrence and Robinson (2007) found that the increasing pressure in organizations as a result of 

increasing competition and economic challenges that may call for restructuring and downsizing 

may result into employees’ misconduct in organizations. 

 

METHODOLOGY 

Research Design 

The study used experimental quantitative research design along with a set of questionnaire. The 

study is designed to find out the causal relationship of job satisfaction, job stress, job 

engagement compare to the workplace deviant behavior. Exploratory research is conducted to 

determine the causal relationship of dependent and independent variable. 

 

Participants and Procedures 

This study is conducted on the bank employee of several private and public commercial 

banks of Bangladesh. A total of 82 participants of the study was randomly selected from 

those organizations. 

 

Hypotheses 

This study is designed with four variables namely Job satisfaction, Job engagement, Job 

Stress and WDB. The study is based on following hypotheses. 

 

H1: There is positive relation between Job Engagement and Job Satisfaction.  

H2: There is negative relation between Job Stress and Job Satisfaction. 

H3: There is negative relation between Job Engagement and WDB.  

H4: There is positive relation between Job Stress and WDB. 

H5: There is negative relation between Job Satisfaction and Workplace Deviant Behavior. 

 

Questionnaire Design 

We used a questionnaire consists of five sections; demographic data, job engagement, stress, job 

satisfaction, and workplace deviant behaviors. (Vance, 2006), (Alpern et al., 2013), (Bennett & 

Robinson, 2000) 

 

S_1: I feel mental stress because of too much 

work. S_2: I am seldom rewarded for my hard 

work and efficient performance. 

S_3: My authorities do not give few 

significance to my post and work. 

ST_1: I am satisfied with the bank's promotion 

policy. 

ST_2: The employees in my branch have good 

relationships among each other. 

ST_3: My supervisor is fair and he evaluates 

job performance based on clear performance 

standard. ST_4: This Bank's management is of 

best standards. 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

18 

E_1: I take the initiative to help other 

employees when problem arises, 

E_2: I accept changes in the Bank willingly, 

E_3: I am always willing to take tasks. 

W_1: I embarrassed someone publicly at work. 

W_2: I spend too much time on fantasizing 

instead of working. 

W_3: I usually put little effort into my work. 

W_4: I have taken things from bank without 

permission. 

W_5: Sometimes i intentionally worked at a 

slower pace than my capacity. 

 

Demographic Survey and Statistical Tools 

The study is employed using Microsoft Excel, IBM SPSS 20 and Smart PLS 3. This study mainly 

followed Structured Equation Modeling to describe the causality of the dependent and 

independent variables. 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Gender 

 

In the following study, out of 82 participants, 70% are male and 19.3% are female. Also, 10.8% 

participant didn’t respond to the respective question and most of the participants were having 1 to 

10 years of job experience in their current organizations. 

 

Figure 2. Work Experience. 

 

 

 

 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

19 

Conceptual Framework 

 

 
 

Figure 3. Conceptual Framework 

 

This model is employed using Structured Equation Modeling approach. In order to define 

causal effect this model is constructed considering workplace deviant behavior and job 

satisfaction as dependent variable. 

Figure 3 shows that job stress and job engagement might have a causal effect with job 

satisfaction and workplace deviant behavior. It means that if any employee have comparatively 

higher job stress, he/she might be dissatisfied with the job which will result in workplace deviant 

behaviors. 

On the other hand, the employees who more or less behave positively with the given 

tasks and highly engaged with the organizational activities, might be satisfied with their job and 

ultimately will not show the workplace deviant behaviors. 

 

RESULT AND DISCUSSION 

  Table 1. Descriptive Statistics 

 

 N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. 

Deviation 

Skewness Kurtosis 

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. 

Error 

Statistic Std. 

Error 

Engagement 82 3.00 13.00 8.3902 2.10089 -.067 .266 -.192 .526 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

20 

Stress 82 5.00 19.00 11.8171 3.31896 -.174 .266 -.424 .526 

WDB 82 5.00 19.00 11.8171 3.31896 -.174 .266 -.424 .526 

Satisfaction 82 8.00 20.00 14.7073 3.01637 -.423 .266 -.517 .526 

Valid N (List 

wise) 

82         

Source: SPSS Output 

 

Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics for the dependent and independent variables. It 

describes the highest mean value for the job satisfaction and lower mean value for the job 

engagement. Considering the items of the variables the mean value depicts that bank employees 

are satisfied with overall workplace environment. Also, Standard Deviation of the statistics shows 

highest for the variable WDB and Stress which means employees are more or less habituated 

with work stress and which result in negative behavioral attitude. The standard value of 

skewness and kurtosis is in between +2 and -2. In this study, the skewness and Kurtosis value 

concludes that data is normally distributed. 

 

Table 2. Correlations 

 

 WDB Engagement Stress Satisfaction 

WDB 1.000 -.140 1.000 -.348 

Engagement -.140 1.000 .140 .330 

Pearson Correlation     

Stress 1.000 -.140 1.000 -.348 

Satisfaction -.348 .330 -.348 1.000 

WDB . .105 .000 .001 

Engagement .105 . .105 .001 

Sig. (1-tailed)     

Stress .000 .105 . .001 

Satisfaction .001 .001 .001 . 

WDB 82 82 82 82 

Engagement 82 82 82 82 

N     

Stress 82 82 82 82 

Satisfaction 82 82 82 82 

Source: SPSS Output 

 

Table two shows the Pearson correlation matrix for the dependent and independent 

variables. It describes that Job Stress is significantly correlated with WDB. It concludes that 

stress is the significant reason for showing dissatisfaction and deviant behaviors in their 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

21 

workplace. This table also concludes that unsatisfied employees significantly show the 

workplace deviant behavior. Moreover, it is also found that there is significant positive 

correlation between job engagement and job satisfaction. 

   

Table 3. Reliability Matrix 

 
Variables Cronbach's 

Alpha 
rho A Composite 

Reliability 

Average Variance 

Extracted (AVE) 

Job Engagement 0.692 0.59 0.385 0.281 

Job Satisfaction 0.821 0.826 0.818 0.532 

Job Stress 0.464 0.619 0.543 0.306 

WDB 0.666 0.683 0.655 0.285 

Source: Smart PLS 3 output 
 

Reliability matrix shows the internal consistency of the items. Cronbach’s Alpha value 

concludes that the variable job satisfaction (>.80) is consistent according to its value. The Alpha 

value of job engagement, job stress and workplace deveined behavior is less than .8 which is 

inconsistent. 

 

Table 4. Regression 

 

 R Square R Square Adjusted 
Job Satisfaction 0.288 0.27 
WDB 0.397 0.374 

Source: Smart PLS 3 output 
 

R Square value describes the internal variability of the proposed model. Table 4, 

workplace deviant behavior describes 39.7% variability of the model whereas Job Satisfaction 

defines 28.8% variability of the model. 

 

Table 5. Outer weight of items 

 
Outer weight Original 

Sample 

(O) 

Sample 

Mean (M) 

Standard 
Deviation 
(STDEV) 

T Statistics 

(|O/STDEV|) 

P Values 

E_1 <- engagement 0.606 0.502 0.269 2.249 0.025 

E_2 <- engagement -0.102 0.018 0.405 0.253 0.8 

E_3 <- engagement 0.561 0.474 0.218 2.577 0.01 

ST_1 <- 
satisfaction_ 

0.32 0.321 0.05 6.339 0 

ST_2 <- 
satisfaction_ 

0.255 0.259 0.054 4.714 0 

ST_3 <- 
satisfaction_ 

0.346 0.343 0.042 8.204 0 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

22 

ST_4 <- 
satisfaction_ 

0.318 0.314 0.064 5.003 0 

S_1 <- stress 0.302 0.274 0.221 1.365 0.173 

S_2 <- stress 0.396 0.377 0.187 2.125 0.034 

S_3 <- stress 0.654 0.625 0.138 4.722 0 

W_1 <- WDB_ 0.221 0.223 0.124 1.785 0.075 

W_2 <- WDB_ 0.228 0.245 0.108 2.107 0.035 

W_3 <- WDB_ 0.32 0.308 0.121 2.636 0.009 

W_4 <- WDB_ 0.393 0.349 0.093 4.202 0 

W_5 <- WDB_ 0.348 0.334 0.108 3.215 0.001 

Source: Smart PLS 3 output 
 

Table 5 shows outer weights for each item of the variable. Outer weights of the following 

model show that all the items of the variables are statistically significant (<0.05) except the S1 for 

job stress and W1 for WDB. 

 

 Table 6. Decision Table 

 

Hypothesis Description Decision 

H1 There is positive relation between Job 

Engagement and Job Satisfaction 

Accepted 

H2 There is negative relation between Job Stress and 

Job Satisfaction 

Accepted 

H3 There is negative relation between Job 

Engagement and WDB. 

Accepted 

H4 There is positive relation between Job Stress and 
WDB. 

Accepted 

H5 There is negative relation between Job 

Satisfaction and WDB. 

Accepted 

 

CONCLUSION 

To conclude, this study found that job satisfaction, stress and job engagement were correlated 

with WDB. Besides, stress and job engagement had correlation with job satisfaction. However, 

the direction of the correlation of variables were not same. The more job engagement and 

satisfied employees in the organization, the lesser the WDB. While for stress the more stress 

employees experience, the higher the WDB. In another model, we showed that job engagement 

and stress had positive and negative correlation with job satisfaction respectively. Organization 

and the authority must ensure employees’ job satisfaction and should pay attention to the reasons 

for job stress and low job engagement which will lessen WDB. 

For future research on this similar study, the number of respondents should be extended. 

Furthermore, more research is highly needed by specifying and considering organization’s 

internal and external factors associated with job satisfaction, job stress, job engagement and 

WDB. 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

23 

REFERENCES 

Alpern, R., Canavan, M. E., Thompson, J. T., McNatt, Z., Tatek, D., Lindfield, T., & Bradley, 

E. H. (2013). Development of a brief instrument for assessing healthcare employee 

satisfaction in a low-income setting. PLoS ONE, 8(11). 

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079053 

 

Appelbaum, S. H., Deguire, K. J., & Lay, M. (2005). The relationship of ethical climate to 

deviant workplace behaviour. Corporate Governance, 5(4), 43–55. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/14720700510616587 

 

Bakker, A., Gonzáles-Romá, V., Salanova, M., & Schaufeli, W. (2002). The measurement of 

Engagement and Burnout: A Two Sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. 

Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. Retrieved from 

http://www.jwalkonline.org/docs/Grad Classes/Fall 07/Org 

Develop/presentation/ARTICLES/measure engage and burnout.pdf 

 

Baum, A., Singer, J. E., & Baum, C. S. (1981). Stress and the Environment., 37(1), 4–35. 

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1981.tb01056.x 

 

Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. 

Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-

9010.85.3.349 

 

Bowling, N. A. (2010). Effects of job satisfaction and conscientiousness on extra-role behaviors. 

Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(1), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-

009-9134-0 

 

Chen, P. Y., & Spector, P. E. (1992). Relationships of work stressors with aggression, 

withdrawal, theft and substance use: An exploratory study. Journal of Occupational and 

Organizational Psychology, 65(3), 177–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-

8325.1992.tb00495.x 

 

Cooke, R. A., & Rousseau, D. M. (1984). Stress and strain from family roles and work-role 

expectations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 252–260. 

https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.69.2.252 

 

Feldman, D. C. (1984). The Development and Enforcement of Group Norms. Academy of 

Management Review, 9(1), 47–53. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4277934 

 

Greenberg, J., & Scott, K. S. (1996). Why do workers bite the hands that feed them? Employee 

theft as a social exchange process. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18(c), 111–

156. 

 

Hershcovis, M. S., Turner, N., Barling, J., Arnold, K. A., Dupré, K. E., Inness, M., … 

Sivanathan, N. (2007). Predicting workplace aggression: A meta-analysis. Journal of 

Applied Psychology, 92(1), 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.228 



https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/BJMSR           Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research           Vol. 4, No. 1; 2021 

24 

Lawrence, T. B., & Robinson, S. L. (2007). Ain’t Misbehavin: Workplace deviance as 

organizational resistance. Journal of Management, 33(3), 378–394. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300816 

 

Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive Supervision and Workplace Deviance and 

the Moderating Effects of Negative Reciprocity Beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 

92(4), 1159– 1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1159 

 

Mount, M., Ilies, R., & Johnson, E. (2006). Relationship of personality traits and 

counterproductive work behaviors: The mediating effects of job satisfaction. Personnel 

Psychology, 59(3), 591–622. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00048.x 

 

Omar, F., Halim, F. W., Zainah, A. Z., Farhadi, H., Nasir, R., & Khairudin, R. (2011). Stress 

and job satisfaction as antecedents of workplace deviant behavior. World Applied 

Sciences Journal, 12(16), 45–51. 

 

Safaria, T., Othman, A. bin, & Abdul Wahab, M. N. (2010). Religious Coping, Job Insecurity 

and Job Stress among Javanese Academic Staff: a Moderated Regression Analysis. 

International Journal of Psychological Studies, 2(2). 

https://doi.org/10.5539/ijps.v2n2p159 

 

Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of 

Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600–619. 

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169 

 

Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2005). The Stressor-Emotion Model of Counterproductive Work 

Behavior. American Psychological Association, 151–174. 

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/10893-007 

 

Srivastava, S. (2012). Workplace Passion as a Moderator for Workplace Deviant Behaviour–Job 

Satisfaction Relationship: A Comparative Study between Public Sector and Private 

Sector Managers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 8(4), 

517–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/2319510x13481914 

 

Vance, R. J. (2006). Employee engagement and commitment: A guide to understanding, 

measuring and increasing engagement in your organization. SHRM Foundation’s 

Effective Practice Guidelines, 1–53. 

 

 

Copyrights 

Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the 

journal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative 

Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) 


