Indagine ifrei italy_2010

IESE
Family-Responsible environment (FRe) Index
for the World and Italy

Prof. Nuria Chinchilla
Prof. Mireia Las Heras
© IESE Business School - Barcelona - 2011 Page 1

In collaboration with:

ELIS Politecnico Milan
Italy Italy


The Corporate Sponsors of the International Center for Work and Family


Principal Objetive

To show the impact of family-responsible policies, practices and leadership on your health, your
commitment to loyalty, your intention to leave to the company, and your satisfaction.


Overall Model for the Study
The Country

Legislation Culture and values

Work Environment

Policies
Impact on Results
Supervisor
Your FR Environment Organizational Individual

Culture

Responsibility and role at
Individual characteristics
home

The Individual


Model FRe (Family-Responsible environment)

Contaminating
Contaminante Enriching
Enriquecedora A. Environment that systematically facilitates work-
family balance
Systematic

B. Environment that occasionally facilitates work-family
D A balance

C. Environment that occasionally hinders work-family
balance
Discrecional

C B D. Environment that systematically hinders work-family
balance


IFREI Study Framework

FR Environment Impact on Results

A. FR Policies B. FR Supervisor Organizational Individual
1. Flexibility with Time and Space 1. Emotional Support 1. Intention to Leave 1. Overall Health
2. Family Support 2. Instrumental Support
3. Information 3. Policy Management 2. Loyalty 2. Family ↔ Work Enrichment
4. Maternity/Paternity Leave 4. Role Model
3. Commitment 3. Satisfaction with
Work/Family Balance
4. Perceived Organizational
C. FR Culture Support

Individual Characteristics

A. Coping B. Integration/ C. Job Preferences D. Transition
Strategies Segmentation Styles
Preferences


Worldwide IFREI Study:
In progress in 22 countries

EUROPE
NORTH AND Germany
CENTRAL AMERICA Italy
Canada Netherlands
Portugal ASIA
Costa Rica
Spain China
El Salvador Philippines
Guatemala
Mexico
AFRICA
Kenya
SOUTH AMERICA
Nigeria
Argentina
Brazil
Chile AUSTRALIA
Colombia Nueva
New Zealand
Zelanda
Ecuador
Peru Methodology: quantitative
Venezuela Instrument: structured questionnaires
Period: 2010-2011


Worldwide IFREI Study Until Today (May 2011)

NORTH AND
EUROPE
CENTRAL AMERICA
1275 participants
386 participants
21% ASIA
6%
499 participants
8%

AFRICA
402 participants
SOUTH AMERICA
7%
3637 participants
58%

Total Participants: 5449


Participation in the Worldwide IFREI Study

Women: 2161 / 40% Men: 3288 / 60%

Women with children: Women without children:
54% 46% Men with children: 66% Men without children: 34%

Women with management responsibility: Women without management responsibility: Men with management responsibility: 61% Men without management responsibility: 39%
52% 48%

Without children Without children
With children With children
40% 40%
51% 29%

60% 49% 71% 60%


IFREI study in Italy

Women: 139 / 24% Men: 430 / 76%

Women with children: Women without children:
55% 45% Men with children: 67% Men without children: 33%

Women with management responsibility: Women without management responsibility: Men with management responsibility: 62% Men without management responsibility: 38%
41% 59%

Without children Without children
With children With children
43%
30% 54% 27%

70% 46% 73% 57%


Employees’ Perception of their Work Environment

Contaminating Enriching  10% perceive that their environment systematically
Contaminante Enriquecedora
facilitates work-family balance
 29% perceive that their environment occasionally
Systematic

D
12% A 10%
hinders work-family balance
 12% perceive that their environment systematically

49% 29%

C B
Discrecional


Employees’ Perception of their Work Environment

Contaminating Enriching  3% perceive that their environment systematically
Contaminante Enriquecedora
Systematic

20%D A3%
 20% perceive that their environment systematically

60% 17%

C B
Discrecional


Family-Responsible Environment:
Policies


FR Policies



1. Time and Location Flexibility 1. Emotional Support 1. Intention to leave 1. Overall Health
3. Information 3. Policy Management 2. Loyalty 2. Family ↔ Work
4. Maternity/Paternity Leave 4. Role Model Enrichment
3. Commitment
3. Satisfaction with
C. FR Culture 4. Perceived Organizational Work/Family Balance
Support


A. Coping B. Integration/ C. Work D. Transition
Strategies Segmentation Preferences Styles
Preferences


FR Policies

Family-responsible policies are the practices formally established within a company that support employee work-life balance by providing
flexibility in time and space. They also include those practices that provide professional support, services and family-friendly benefits that go
beyond financial remuneration.


FR Policies

Time and Location Flexibility Professional and Family Support

 Telecommuting: working part or full-time from home or some place outside  Professional counseling
the company  Personal counseling
 Working part-time or job-sharing
 Flexible hours

Family-Friendly Services Family-Friendly Benefits

 Easy access to information about the work-family balance  Childcare center at the workplace
 Seminars, workshops and information sessions on work-family balance  Childcare subsidy


FR Policies

Individuals

Positive Impact of Family- Company
Responsible Policies

Society


FR Policies:
Impact on Individuals

FR policies have a positive impact on individuals since they allow a person to organize their work hours such that time spent working does not
interfere or hamper their family responsibilities. In addition, FR policies tend to reduce commute time, and thus, improve the employee’s
performance.


FR Policies:
Impact on Companies

FR policies have a positive impact on companies because they can facilitate longer customer service hours, reduce expenses due to absenteeism,
and increase the involvement of individuals at work.
Furthermore, FR policies are essentially necessary and positive for industries or sectors that experience constant and rapid product or service
changes, where the added value of the employees is greater.


FR Policies:
Impact on Society

FR policies have a direct impact on society by facilitating the reduction of environmental pollution due to reduced employee commute time.
They also decrease costs in health services since FR policies lessen stress and other related illnesses.
In addition, FR policies have a positive impact on the country's educational level as parents can be more involved in their child’s education,
resulting in better academic performance, as well as reduced addiction and crime rates.


FR Policies:
Time Flexibility

The graph “FR Policies: Time Flexibility” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:

Please indicate if you have access to these policies (Yes / No):

 Part-time work (reduced working hours in exchange for a lower salary)
 Compressed week hours (i.e. half day free in exchange for working longer hours the rest of the week )
 Job-sharing (i.e. when the duties of a full-time position are shared by two or more employees)


FR Policies:
Time Flexibility
100%
Men Worldwide
90% Men Nationwide

80%
Women Worldwide
Women Nationwide
70%

60%

50%

40%
33%
29%
30% 25% 25%
24% 24%
20% 21%
20%
14%
11% 12%
10% 8%

0%
Part-time work Compressed work week Job sharing


FR Policies:
Time and Location Flexibility

The graph “FR Policies: Time and Location Flexibility” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 Flexible work schedule
 Tele-commuting (i.e. allowing employees to work from an alternative location, such as a home office)


FR Policies:
Time and Location Flexibility
100%
Men Worldwide
90% Men Nationwide

80%
Women Worldwide
Women Nationwide
70%

60% 60%
60% 58%
54%
50%
50% 46%

40% 36%
32%
30%

20%

10%

0%
Flexible work hours Tele-commuting


FR Policies:
Family Support

The graph “FR Policies: Family Support” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 Childcare center at the workplace
 Financial help for the care of a child or a dependent
 Leave of absence to take care of a family member


FR Policies:
Family Support
70%

60%

50%
44%
40%
40%
30%
30% 28%
22%
20%
20%
13% 12%
9% 9% 7%
10% 6%

0%
Childcare center at work Subsidy for childcare Permission to leave due to a
family emergency

Men Worldwide Women Worldwide
Men Nationwide Women Nationwide


FR Policies:
Maternity and Paternity Leave Beyond the Legal Minimum

The graph “FR Policies: Maternity and Paternity Leave Beyond the Legal Minimum” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 Maternity leave beyond the legal minimum
 Paternity leave beyond the legal minimum


FR Policies:
Maternity and Paternity Leave beyond the Legal Minimum

Maternity Leave Paternity Leave
Beyond the Legal Minimum Beyond the Legal Minimum
100% 100%
90% 90%
80% Men Worldwide 80%
70% Men Nationwide
70%
60% 60%
50% Women Worldwide 50%
40% Women Nationwide 40%
30% 25% 30%
22%
18%
20% 20%
10% 10% 7%
0% 0%
Maternity leave Paternity leave


FR Policies:
Information

The graph “FR Policies: Information” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 Professional and personal counseling
 Referrals for daycare and schools or elder care and services
 Easy access to information about work-life balance benefits available to you through your company
 Seminars, workshops or information sessions on work/life balance issues


FR Policies:
Information
100%

90%

80%

70%

60%
50% 48%
50%

40% 37% 38% 37% 35%

30%
21% 19% 19% 21%
20% 17% 18%
15% 13%
11% 12%
10%

0%
Professional and personal Referrals for daycare/ Access to information Seminars & workshops on
counseling schools & elder care about work-life balance work-life balance
services
Men Worldwide Women Worldwide

Men Nationwide Women Nationwide


Supervisor


FR Supervisor



1. Time and Location Flexibility 1. Emotional Support 1. Intention to leave 1. Overall Health
3. Commitment
Support


Preferences


FR Supervisor

A family-responsible supervisor is one who responds to the family needs of his/her employees. Furthermore, he/she supports and facilitates
work-family balance, promotes the use of family-responsible practices and is open and sensitive to these issues, while respecting personal
freedom.


FR Supervisor:
Supervisor’s Emotional Support

The graphs “FR Supervisor: Supervisor’s Emotional Support” refer to the following questions in the questionnaire:

Do you agree with the following statements? (1 = strongly disagree / 7 = strongly agree)

 My supervisor is willing to listen to my problems in juggling work and non-work life
 My supervisor takes the time to learn about my personal needs
 My supervisor makes me feel comfortable talking to him or her about my conflicts between work and non-work
 My supervisor and I can talk effectively to solve conflicts between work and non-work issues


FR Supervisor:
Supervisors Showing Excellent Emotional Support

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 35% 40%
31%
30% 30%

20% 20% 17%
14%
10% 10%

0% 0%
6-7 6-7


FR Supervisor:
Employee Perception of the Supervisor’s Excellent Emotional Support

Global National
Male Manager

31% 30%
18% 12%
Female Manager

11% 21%
36% 41%

Male Non-Manager Female Non-Manager Male Non-Manager Female Non-Manager

The graphic shows the percentage of employees who receive excellent emotional support from their supervisor. (score of 6-7 on a
scale of 1-7, 7 being excellent)


FR Supervisor:
Supervisor’s Instrumental Support

The graphs “FR Supervisor: Supervisor’s Instrumental Support” refer to the following question in the questionnaire:


 I can depend on my supervisor to help me with scheduling conflicts between work and non-work issues


FR Supervisor:
Supervisors Showing Excellent Instrumental Support

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 44% 44% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%
20%
20% 20% 17%

10% 10%

0% 0%
6-7 6-7


FR Supervisor:
Employee Perception of the Supervisor’s Excellent Instrumental Support

Global National
Male Manager

45% 40%
20% 15%
Female Manager

17% 21%
45% 50%


The chart shows the percentage of employees who receive excellent instrumental support from their supervisor. (score of 6-7 on a
scale of 1-7, 7 being excellent)


FR Supervisor:
Supervisor’s Policy Management

The graphs “FR Supervisor: Supervisor’s Policy Management” refer to the following question in the questionnaire:


 My supervisor asks for suggestions to make it easier for employees to balance work and non-work demands


FR Supervisor:
Supervisors Showing Excellent Policy Management

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 44% 50%
43%
40% 40%

30% 30%
23%
20% 20% 17%

10% 10%

0% 0%
6-7 6-7


FR Supervisor:
Employee Perception of the Supervisor’s Excellent Policy Management

Global National
Male Manager

44% 39%
24% 17%
Female Manager

17% 18%
46% 51%


The chart shows the percentage of employees who receive excellent policy management support from their supervisor. (score of 6-7
on a scale of 1-7, 7 being excellent)


FR Supervisor:
Supervisors as Role Models

The graphs “FR Supervisor: Supervisors as Role Models” refer to the following question in the questionnaire:

Do you agree with the following statement? (1 = strongly disagree / 7 = strongly agree)

 My supervisor is a good role model for work and non-work balance


FR Supervisor:
Supervisors Who are Perceived as Excellent Role Models

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%
42%
40% 38% 40%

30% 30%

20% 18%
20% 14%
10% 10%

0% 0%
6-7 6-7


FR Supervisor:
Employee Perception of the Supervisor as an Excellent Role Model

Global National
Male Manager

37% 37%
19% 15%
Female Manager

15% 13%
39% 46%


The chart shows the percentage of employees who perceive their supervisor as an excellent role model. (score of 6-7 on a scale of 1-
7, 7 being excellent)


Organizational Culture

F Environment
R Impact on Results

A. F Policies
R B. F Supervisor
R Organizational Individual

1.Time and Location Flexibility 1.Emotional Support 1.Intention to Leave 1.Overall Health
2.Family Support 2.Instrumental Support
3.Information 3.Policy Management 2.Loyalty 2.Family ↔ Work
4.Maternity/Paternity Leave 4.Role Model Enrichment
3.Commitment
3.Satisfaction with
C. F Culture
R 4.Perceived Work/F amily Balance
Organizational
Support

Preferences


FR Organizational Culture



1. Time and Location Flexibility 1. Emotional Support 1. Intention to Leave 1. Overall Health
3. Commitment
Support


Preferences


FR Organizational Culture

An FR organizational culture promotes work-life balance:
 People who use flexible policies are valued for their contribution to the company and not penalized for the use of flexible policies.
 A person’s workload is respected and it is not expected that people constantly place their work before their family.


FR Organizational Culture:
Co-Workers Respect For Extended Maternity or Paternity Leave

The graph “FR Organizational Culture: Co-Workers Who Respect Extended Maternity or Paternity Leave” refers to the following questions in the
questionnaire:

Do you agree with the following statements?
(1 = strongly disagree / 7 = strongly agree)

 Many employees are resentful when men in this organization take extended leaves to care for newborn or adopted children
 Many employees are resentful when women in this organization take extended leaves to care for newborn or adopted children

In this dimension, the lower the score between 1 and 7, the more family-responsible the culture.


Co-Workers Who Respect Extended Maternity or Paternity Leave

Global Men National
100%
Women
100%
90%
90%
80%
80%
70% 70%
60% 60%
50% 50%
42% 42% 44%
40% 40% 34%
30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
1-2
6-7 1-2
6-7

The 1-2 signifies that co-workers are not bothered by extended leaves. Therefore, it is an FR culture.


Negative Consequences for the Career

The graph “FR Organizational Culture: Negative Consequences for the Career due to FR Behavior” refers to the following questions in the
questionnaire:


 In this organization employees who participate in available work-family programs are viewed as less serious about their careers than those who
do not participate in these programs
 To turn down a promotion or transfer for family-related reasons will seriously hurt one’s career progress in this organization
 In this organization employees on a flexible schedule are less likely to advance their careers than those who do not use flextime



Negative Consequences for the Career due to FR Behavior

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 24% 30%
18% 20%
20%
10% 9%
10% 10%

0% 0%
1-2
6-7 1-2
6-7

The 1-2 signifies that there are no negative consequences. Therefore, it is an FR culture.


Expectations regarding Workload and Working Hours

El The graph “FR Organizational Culture: FR Expectations regarding Workload and Working Hours” refers to the following questions in the
questionnaire:


 To get ahead at this organization, employees are expected to work more than 50 hours a week, whether at the workplace or at home
 Employees are often expected to take work home in the evenings and/or on weekends
 Employees are regularly expected to put their jobs before their families
 To be viewed favorably by top management, employees in this organization must constantly put their jobs ahead of their families or personal
lives



FR Expectations regarding Workload and Working Hours

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%
51%
49%
50% 50%

40% 40% 34%
29%
30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
1-2
6-7 1-2
6-7

The 1-2 signifies that there are no expectations regarding workload and hours. Therefore, it is an FR culture.


Individual Characteristics: Coping
Strategies


Coping Strategies



3. Commitment
Support


Preferences


Coping Strategies

Coping strategies are the methods people use to overcome challenges and accomplish all they have committed to at home and at work.

Coping strategies consist in:

 Planning daily work and prioritizing different tasks
 Seeking emotional and material support among family and friends


Coping Strategies:
Planning & Prioritizing

The graph “Coping Strategies: Planning & Prioritizing” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 I plan and organize my time at work
 I set priorities and do the most important thing first
 I work more efficiently so I can finish things quickly
 I plan and organize my tasks


Coping Strategies:
Do not plan my workload Plan my workload

100%
Men Worldwide
90% Women Worldwide

80%

70% 63%
60% 55%

50% 43%
40% 36%

30%

20%

10%
1% 1%
0%
1-2 3-5 6-7


Coping Strategies:
Do not plan my workload Plan my workload

100% Men Nationwide
90% Women Nationwide

80%

70%

60% 57%
52%
50% 46%
43%
40%

30%

20%

10%
1% 2%
0%
1-2 3-5 6-7


Coping Strategies:
Seeking Social Support

The graph “Coping Strategies: Seeking Social Support” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 I talk about my feelings with someone who is not directly involved
 I have several friends I can readily talk to about what matters most to me
 I seek understanding from someone
 I ask my relatives for help when I need it
 My family helps me if I have a problem


Coping Strategies:
Seeking Social Support

100% Male Non-Managers
Male Managers
90%

80%
Female Non-Managers
70%
Female Managers
60%

50%
40% 39% 39%
37% 40%
31%
27% 25% 30%
19%
20%

10%

0%
Without Children With Children


Individual Characteristics:
Preferences for Integration or
Segmentation


Preferences for Integration or Segmentation



3. Commitment
Support


Preferences


Preference for Integration or Segmentation

Some individuals prefer to establish barriers such that work and family domains do not overlap and are completely separate (segmentation).
Others prefer to unify the different domains (integration).

Segmentation and integration are two extremes of a continuum. At one end, work and non-work life do not overlap at all; on the other end,
they fully share the same time and space.

In and of itself, one preference is not better than the other. However, a company’s way of working to accommodate the preferences of an
individual, whether it be integration or segmentation, is significant.


Preference for Integration or Segmentation:
Working at Home

The graphs “Preference for Integration or Segmentation: Working at Home” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:

How acceptable are the following situations for you? (1 = Not at all / 7 = Very much)

 Being required to work while at home
 Being required to think about work while at home
 Being required to think about work once I leave the workplace
 Being expected to take work home


It is acceptable to work at home

Global Men National
Women
100%
100%
90%
90%
80%
80%
70%
70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%
10%
10% 10% 7%
4% 4%
0% 0%
6-7 6-7


It is unacceptable to work at home

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%
63%
60%
60% 60%
53%
50% 50% 45%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
1-2 1-2


Bringing Family Issues to Work

The graph “Preference for Integration or Segmentation: Bringing Family Issues to Work” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:

How acceptable are the following situations for you? (1 = Not at all / 7 = Very much)

 Having to solve family issues while at work
 Thinking about family issues while at work
 Running family errands during standard working hours


It is acceptable to bring family issues to work

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 6% 5% 10% 4% 4%
0% 0%
6-7 6-7


It is unacceptable to bring family issues to work

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 57% 60% 55%
50%
50% 50% 47%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
1-2 1-2


Individual Characteristics: Work
Preferences
F Environment
R Impact on Results

A. F Policies
R B. F Supervisor
R Organizational Individual

1.Time and Location Flexibility 1.Emotional Support 1.Intention to Leave 1.Overall Health
2.Family Support 2.Instrumental Support
3.Information 3.Policy Management 2.Loyalty 2.Family ↔ Work
4.Maternity/Paternity Leave 4.Role Model Enrichment
3.Commitment
3.Satisfaction with
C. F Culture
R 4.Perceived Work/F amily Balance
Organizational
Support

Preferences


Work Preferences



3. Commitment
Support


Preferences


Work Preferences

It is defined as the reason or reasons why an individual decides to work on a particular task or in a particular job. There are three types:
preference for extrinsic, intrinsic and transcendent motivations.

 Extrinsic motivation: the individual searches for separable and tangible satisfaction generated by interactions. In other words, the individual
searches for his or her own satisfaction without considering the consequences for others.

 Intrinsic motivation or preference for growth opportunities: it is what causes a person to search for his or her own learning.

 Transcendent motivation or preference for opportunities to contribute: it is what causes a person to consider positive and relevant learning.
Persons that act on transcendent motivations grant importance to the effects of their actions on others.


Work Preferences:
Preference for Growth Opportunities

The graph “Work Preferences: Preference for Growth Opportunities” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 I like challenging jobs
 I do not like repetitive jobs, without a lot of decision making or major challenges (reverse)
 I prefer assignments that contribute to my professional experience


Work Preferences:
Strong Preference for Growth Opportunities

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%
73% 71%
70% 70%
60%
60% 60%

50% 48%
50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
6-7 6-7


Work Preferences:
Preference for Opportunities to Contribute

The graph “Work Preferences: Preference for Opportunities to Contribute” refers to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 I feel really fulfilled when I can be useful to others
 I am deeply thankful to those who help me
 All things being equal, I prefer a job where I can be more useful to others
 What I like the most in my job is that I can contribute to the good of others


Work Preferences:
Strong Preference for Opportunities to Contribute

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 75% 80%
69%
70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50% 45%
39%
40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
6-7 6-7


Individual Characteristics:
Transition Styles


Transition Styles



3. Commitment
Support


Preferences


Transition Styles

Transition styles describe the way in which individuals make the mental switch from one environment to the next (“being at home” to “being
at work” and vice versa). They cross physical and psychological boundaries.

There are three basic styles:

 Anticipatory: the concern with the domain of destination begins before the person physically leaves their current domain.

 Discrete: the concern with the domain of destination starts upon arrival there.

 Lagged: the concern with the newly entered domain does not start until the individual has been physically present there for a period of time.


Transition Styles

The graphs “Transition Styles” refer exclusively to the anticipatory style and are measured through the following questions in the questionnaire:


 I tend to start thinking about work issues when I go to my workplace
 When I get to work, I have already been thinking about work-related issues that are waiting for me


Transition Styles:
I think of work before arriving there

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70% 65%
63%
60% 56% 60%
50%
50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% 0%
6-7 6-7


Transition Styles:
I do not think of work before arriving there

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 7% 8% 10%
3% 2%
0% 0%
1-2 1-2


Impact on Organizational Results


Impact on Organizational Results



3. Commitment
C. FR Culture 4. Perception of Work/Family Balance
Organizational Support


Preferences


Impact on Organizational Results:
Intention to Leave the Company

Undesired turnover has negative consequences that affect the morale of the other employees as well as the outcomes for the company:

 Lower productivity
 Loss of expertise
 Deteriorated work environment and lack of motivation among the remaining staff

In addition, there are significant direct costs:
 Costs of recruitment for a replacement
 Costs of training a new employee
 Costs of substitution while the vacant position is covered



The graphs “Impact on Organizational Results: Intention to Leave the Company” refer to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 I would prefer another more ideal job than the one I have now
 If it was up to me, in three years I would not be in this organization
 I frequently think of quitting my job


7 Intention to leave

6

4,6 5

3,6 4

2,8 3
2,2
2
No intention to leave
1
D C B A
12% 49% 29% 10%

The more FR the environment is, less is the intention of the employee to leave.


7
Intention to leave

6

4,8 5

3,6 4

2,5 3
2,2
2
No intention to leave
1
D C B A
20% 60% 17% 3%


Loyalty

The graphs “Impact on Organizational Results: Loyalty” refer to the following questions in the questionnaire:


 I am loyal to this organization
 I frequently suggest new ideas to improve my department
 I am expected to do only the job that I am paid to do
 Even when it is not required, I try to help other colleagues with their work


Participants who demonstrate loyalty

Global Men National
Women
100% 100%

90% 90%

80% 80%

70% 70%

60% 60%

50% 50%

40% 40%

30% 30%
19%
20% 15% 20% 16%
14%
10% 10%

0% 0%
6-7 6-7


Participants who do not demonstrate loyalty

Global Men National
Women
100,0% 100%

90,0% 90%

80,0% 80%

70,0% 70%

60,0% 60%

50,0% 50%

40,0% 40%

30,0% 30%

20,0% 20%

10,0% 10%
0,5% 0,4% 0% 1%
0,0% 0%
1-2 1-2


Indagine ifrei italy_2010

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Indagine ifrei italy_2010

Semelhante a Indagine ifrei italy_2010 (20)

Mais de InterMedia Consulting

Mais de InterMedia Consulting (20)

Último

Último (20)

Indagine ifrei italy_2010