University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Understanding how organizational culture and expectations influence retention of managers

(USC Thesis Other)

Understanding how organizational culture and expectations influence retention of managers

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Understanding How Organizational Culture and Expectations Influence Retention of
Managers

Ahmad M Hashim Murtada

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2023

© Copyright by Ahmad M Hashim Murtada 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Ahmad M Hashim Murtada certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Jenifer Anne Crawford
Cathy Krop
Paula M Carbone, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
Organizational culture has become increasingly important to the current and new workforce
within our society. Organization culture has been a leading cause of decreased employee
retention in recent years, this dissertation will explore what factors within an organization impact
its culture. The focus will be on how opportunities for professional growth, role clarity, and
communication can be improved to ensure that the organization can improve employee retention.
The data collected in this project was through completing semi-structured interviews with
previous Shipping Direct managers that specifically worked with the Final Mile Delivery
Department. These employees left the organization voluntarily and were between Level 4 to 6
while working at the organization. One of the themes uncovered after the research was complete
as to why managers left their position was the demanding organization culture and environment
that was focus on performance and metrics instead of the people, a lack of role clarity as to what
the responsibilities were that added pressure to their positions, a lack of opportunities for
professional growth given by upper management and lack of work life balance due to their
inability to take time off and expectation to work long hours. The recommendations were to
Improve role clarity and communication, clarify the promotion and transfer process, and
improving work life balance. The findings from this research can be used to help address the
factors that impacted the retention of the employees and to ensure they are no longer an issue for
current and future employees.

v
Dedication
To my wife and kids, without your love and support, none of this would have been possible.

vi
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my Chair Dr. Paula Carbone. I could not have completed this
without your guidance and continued support. I am thankful for all the feedback, your continued
patience, building my confidence and helping push me to the finish line.
I would also like to thank the USC faculty during my time in the program for helping
guide me through this process and allowing me to better refine my thoughts and ideas throughout
the process. Would also like to thank my study group during my tenure at the program for
helping my understanding of the process, proofreading my work, and talking through any
problems that came up.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
Chapter One: Retention of Employees ........................................................................................... 1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................ 3
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions .................................................................. 6
Importance of the Study ...................................................................................................... 7
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 9
Definitions......................................................................................................................... 10
Organization of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 11
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................................. 12
Manager Retention ............................................................................................................ 12
Communication ................................................................................................................. 14
Opportunities for Professional Growth ............................................................................. 15
Regional Management and Human Resources Influence on Retention............................ 16
Role Clarity ....................................................................................................................... 17
Current Retention Trends and Organizational Commitment ............................................ 19
Social Cognitive Theory ................................................................................................... 21
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 23
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 24
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 24
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 24
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 25

viii
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 25
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 27
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 28
Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................... 29
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 30
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 31
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 32
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 33
Research Question 1: What Environmental Factors Facilitated the Decision of
Former Managers at Levels 4 to 6 in the Final Mile Delivery Department to Seek
Other Employment Opportunities? ................................................................................... 35
Research Question 2: What Suggestions Do Former Managers at Levels 4 to 6 in
the Final Mile Delivery Department Have to Improve the Culture at the
Organization? .................................................................................................................... 53
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 63
Chapter Five: Recommendations .................................................................................................. 65
Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 65
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 67
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 71
Recommendations for Future Research ............................................................................ 72
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 72
References ..................................................................................................................................... 74
Appendix A: Interview Protocol Template ................................................................................... 79

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Job Levels at Shipping Direct 2
Table 2: Participant Tenure Information 35

1

Chapter One: Retention of Employees
Employee retention rates should not be overlooked because they are an effective indicator
of employee morale, organizational health and well-being, job satisfaction, and overall employee
productivity (Mitrovska & Eftimov, 2016). Employee retention helps give organizations a
competitive advantage due to reducing the organization’s focus on consistent hiring (Stone,
2014). Different factors affect employee retention, but organizations with effective strategies to
reduce those numbers end up with lower turnover rates (Stone, 2014). Voluntary employee
separation was up 11.8% in 2019, at an all-time high of 31.1%, from 19.3% in 2010 (U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2022b). Those figures have not been updated to include the employee
shortages faced in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic but still illustrate a continued trend of
employees quitting their jobs year after year.
This dissertation addresses how organizational culture and employees’ knowledge of
expectations influenced the retention of employees. Employees are influenced by organizational
culture, which is defined as values, beliefs, and behavioral patterns that form the core identity of
an organization (Leisanyane & Khaola, 2013). Studies by Longenecker and Fink (2014) ranked
broken organizational culture as the second leading reason an employee will leave their current
position, whereas having a bad manager was ranked first. Understanding the patterns in an
organization’s culture and the expectations that culture puts on employees is important to ensure
that organizations can maintain tenure internally. Stone (2014) defined employee retention as an
organization’s ability to keep its own employees. Shipping Direct, a pseudonym for the company
under study, is a large company focused on mail-order delivery. It has a level system for all
employees, from Level 1 to Level 12. This dissertation focuses on three levels of salary
management in the organization, Levels 4 to 6. These three levels of salary management are the
2

front-line managers who are in the field and usually collaborate with hourly employees, which
are Levels 1 to 3 in the organization. Please reference Table 1 for a guide to levels in the
organization.

Table 1
Job Levels at Shipping Direct
Job level Job level description

Title Position type Pay Direct reports
Level 1 Warehouse associate Part time Hourly No direct reports
Level 2 Trainer Part time Hourly No direct reports
Level 3 Shift assistant Part time or full time Hourly No direct reports
Level 4 Shift manager Full time Salary Levels 1 to 3
Level 5 Area manager Full time Salary Levels 1 to 4
Level 6 Operations manager Full time Salary Levels 4 and 5
Level 7 Regional manager Full time Salary Mainly Level 6

Note. The table illustrates the first seven job levels at Shipping Direct and their basic description.

3

Context and Background of the Problem
Shipping Direct at the time of the study was an E-commerce organization that provided a
marketplace for sellers to sell their products to consumers. I am currently employed at this
organization, my knowledge about the organization is based on my perceptions and experience. I
have been with the organization for over 7 years and am currently a supply chain manager. The
organization has a large system of warehouses across the United States and has global reach
across the world in the same capacity. The focus is on fast delivery to the customer and placing
customer needs first. Its platform for fast delivery is membership based and depends on members
being repeat customers. Products that customers order online are stored in one of the
organization’s many fulfilments centers. From there, the packages go to either third-party
carriers like UPS and the U.S. Postal Service or they get sent to one of the organization’s own
delivery stations, ran by the Final Mile Delivery Department. In the ranks of the organization,
Levels 4 to 6 of salaried management have the highest level of dissatisfaction with the current
organizational culture, which is causing low retention numbers among those three levels of
management. Dissatisfaction with the culture is one of the top reasons that employees leave their
current role, which is costly to any organization. According to Mitrovska and Eftimov (2016),
the cost of turnover is very steep—approximately $21,000 a person every time there is attrition.
These costs are from multiple sources such as training, recruitment, and lost productivity
(Mitrovska & Eftimov, 2016). Getting employees’ perspectives is also important to getting
employee buy-in. When management does not get employee buy-in, studies have shown that
30% of employees look for opportunities elsewhere (de Valk, 2015).
This study focused on former salaried managers from Levels 4 to 6 in the organization
who worked in the Final Mile Delivery Department. This department is responsible for
4

delivering the package to the individual customer who placed the order. The Final Mile Delivery
Department receives packages from one of Shipping Direct’s fulfillment centers and sorts the
packages based on delivery area. That is where the “final mile” in the department name comes
from, because it is the last leg of the supply chain that the package must travel, which entails
delivery to the customer. After the delivery area is sorted, drivers deliver the packages to the end
destination, the customer. The Final Mile Delivery Department is one of the newest in the
organization and only started in 2016 with two Final Mile Delivery locations. Currently, there
are more than three hundred Final Mile Delivery locations in the United States. Due to its newer
nature, there is continued growth, change, and challenges that create a lot of moving parts in the
department. This applies to the Final Mile Delivery network and its various supporting teams.
The Level 4 to 6 management group is the largest group within the organization as they
are the core to operating any sites in the Final Mile Delivery Department. At Levels 4 through 6
in the Final Mile Delivery Department, all managers have direct reports who are either hourly or
salaried. The expectations from a performance perspective in this department are varied and
currently depend on the regional management in charge. Level 4 shift managers are the first level
of salaried management and are usually responsible for running the shifts at the Final Mile
Delivery locations. Level 5 area managers usually are responsible for a specific area in the Final
Mile Delivery location, which can be night sort, morning dispatch, or returns shift. Level 6
operations managers are responsible for the whole Final Mile Delivery location and all its
operations. The typical Final Mile Delivery building has approximately three hundred warehouse
associates, twelve shift assistants, eight shift managers, three area managers, and one operations
manager. Regional managers typically have five to 10 Final Mile Delivery locations for which
they are responsible.
5

The human resources department that supports the Final Mile Delivery locations is
negligible compared to the overall size of a region in this department. Typically, only one to
three human resources managers support a regional manager, which has anywhere from five to
ten buildings, depending on the region, compared to the same number of human resources
managers to only one building for fulfilment centers. Because the Final Mile department is not
standardized, it can create varying degrees of expectations regarding what it can take to be
promoted. Research has shown that lack of job clarity can lead to role ambiguity, leading to
frustration, stress, and turnover (Mafuba et al., 2015). This research shows why consistent
expectations given to everyone from human resources to regional management and established
guidelines to follow are necessary so that managers in Levels 4 to 6 understand the expectations.
During my tenure in this department, I worked at more than ten sites and had
relationships with managers at all different levels at those sites. In the Final Mile Delivery
Department at Shipping Direct, at the time of the study, managerial morale was low, according to
my colleagues and peers. During my 4 years in the department, there was a lot of discussion
between me and my colleagues about the impact of role ambiguity, inconsistent communication,
and a lack of consistent guidelines for managers at Levels 4 to 6 to get promoted on our work–
life balance and the job stress that we experienced working there every day. During my time
working there, I helped more than ten managers get promoted, and the bar that they had to meet
to get promoted was different every time. This led to confusion about what needed to be done for
managers at Levels 4 to 6 to get promoted and led to a lot of frustration with inconsistent
communication when it came to their career development. Through my work at the ten sites, I
noticed that role expectations were inconsistent from site to site for managers at Levels 4 to 6.
Human resources and regional managers also provided inconsistent communication on
6

organizational changes and new launches. The inconsistency of directives given to lower
managers created a lot of confusion among the managers which, based on my experience, led to
continued frustration. There was also a lack of ability to request time off for vacations. During
my tenure in the department, the staffing structure in the Final Mile Delivery Department did not
allow for time off to be taken due to the lack of availability of managers to cover shifts. During
my visits, I would consistently hear the same stories and struggles at the different sites, which
lead to me identifying these issues as problems that need to be addressed. My experience in
multiple sites and my ability to gain the trust of different managers allowed me to gather
information and to better understand the issues that the department was facing. These issues all
led me to believe that the culture needed to change in the department, because this was not an
isolated issue but something affecting the department. A study by Kim and Lee (2009) found a
significant direct path between supervisory communication and role ambiguity with employees’
voluntary intent to leave their positions. Kim and Lee’s findings illustrate the need for Shipping
Direct to focus on these areas to ensure that it can control turnover due to these reasons.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to identify which factors in Shipping Direct’s
organizational culture might influence the organization’s ability to retain its managers. There are
multiple items that can influence an organization’s culture, such as incompetent managers, job
dissatisfaction, or role clarity (Leisanyane & Khaola, 2013). This study aimed to identify factors
that affected low employee retention from the perspective of managers at Levels 4 to 6 in
Shipping Direct’s Final Mile Delivery Department. The findings of this research are intended to
assist the Final Mile Delivery in building strategies to help address any problem areas identified
in the research. Two research questions guided this study:
7

1. What environmental factors facilitated the decision of former managers at Levels 4 to
6 in the Final Mile Delivery Department to seek other employment opportunities?
2. What suggestions do former managers at Levels 4 to 6 in the Final Mile Delivery
Department have to improve the culture at the organization?
Importance of the Study
Researchers have found that broken organizational cultures cause employees to start
looking for other positions and viewing them as more attractive, leading to increased turnover
(Leisanyane & Khaola, 2013; Longenecker & Fink, 2014; Saeed et al., 2018). Leisanyane and
Khaola (2013) highlighted evidence that employees would consider leaving their organization
when the company culture was broken. It is important to address because a growing number of
employees are not afraid to leave their organization, especially when organizational culture is not
what they expect it to be. Saeed et al. (2018) found that the next generation of employees, known
as Millennials, who were born between 19981 and 1996, have a 60% higher likelihood of
changing their position, as compared to previous generations, if they feel the organization’s
culture is broken. Because the workforce at the time of study in 2022 increasingly is not afraid to
look for other positions, this creates the need for organizations to focus more on retaining
employees. Managers at Levels 4 to 6 are proportionally younger than all other management
groups in the department. Level 4 managers are college hires with no management experience.
The move from Level 4 to Level 5 only takes 1 to 2 years. Level 6 management can be achieved
in another 2 years. This population of managers is in the 25- to 35-year-old range. Creating
equity for the younger generation of employees who are hungry for growth by standardizing the
process will help improve the moral and overall culture in the department. Equity is important
because research has shown that employees who work for a support-oriented culture are more
8

satisfied with their jobs and equity creates an environment that is aimed at benefiting the
employees and organization alike (Lopez-Martin & Topa, 2019).
Another aspect negative of organizational culture on employees is both emotional and
mental effects on their health and relationship with their organization. Employees’ emotional
connection to their organization is affected by the current organizational culture at the
organization (Men & Robinson, 2018). Men and Robinson (2018) illustrated that a culture of fear
in an organization negatively affected the employees’ psychological need for relatedness. The
authors defined relatedness as an essential need to rely on others and without it, employees did
not feel that they could rely on their coworkers and management to help them in completing
tasks. Men and Robinson also found that this lack of trust in the organization due to a culture of
fear created a negative relationship between the employee and the organization, which could lead
to decreased retention rates. Negative organizational culture can also affect an employee’s
mental health. Lopez-Martin and Topa (2019) found a negative correlation between
organizations with goal-oriented cultures and employees’ overall mental health. Their study
illustrated that employees in environments that were stressful and where they did not feel
supported perceived that their mental and physical health overall were negatively affected. These
results are examples of why mental and emotional health are two crucial factors worthy of
attention to when it comes to establishing a supportive organizational culture in an organization.
Although the well-being of employees is most important, not addressing employee
retention issues internally has other hidden costs. Tracey and Hinkin (2008) explained that a lot
of the costs associated with employee turnover will not show up in financial statements;
therefore, they often go overlooked. These costs are hard to quantify with a number, which is
why they often do not draw much attention. Things such as the time it takes to recruit, interview,
9

and train new employees are often called soft costs, none of which are measured in
organizational budgets (Tracey & Kinkin, 2008). These tasks are not only hard to quantify but
also can be a distraction from efforts to continue organizational growth (Tracey & Kinkin, 2008).
If organizations want to remain competitive, they need to spend their time on continued growth
and development instead of a consistent focus on hiring new employees (Stone, 2008).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This study used social cognitive theory as a lens of focus. Social cognitive theory focuses
on the influences of three determinants: personal, behavioral, and environmental (Bandura,
2012). These three functions work together to help influence the decisions that a person will
make (Bandura, 2012). Using this lens, the focus can be on the influence of observed behaviors
in the organization and the environmental determinants that influence those behaviors in the
organization. The interplay of those two factors affects the individual experiences of managers,
which is the personal determinant in social cognitive theory. If the behaviors of inconsistent
messaging to managers at Levels 4 to 6 by regional management and the human resources
department at Shipping Direct continue, the environment could also be negatively affected,
because it could cause job dissatisfaction. Social cognitive theory enabled this study to focus on
the interplay of those three factors and how they affect the decisions of managers at Levels 4 to 6
to leave the organization. The focus is on how these observed behaviors of inconsistent
messaging, role clarity, and lack of clear path to promotion can affect environmental factors such
as the organizational culture at Shipping Direct. The data collected could highlight where the
Final Mile Delivery Department should focus its resources and what factors lead employees to
leave the organization.
10

This study used a qualitative approach to collect data. Creswell and Creswell (2018)
defined the qualitative research approach as framed using words and open-ended questions and
responses. The qualitative approach in this study involved interviews with the population.
Interviews were completed with former Shipping Direct employees who had left the company by
voluntary resignation and worked as a manager at Levels 4 to 6 in the Final Mile Delivery
Department. They consisted of semi structured questions with that group of participants. Then,
the interview data were coded and organized, such that an analysis of the results could be
completed using the themes formed during the coding process (Gibbs, 2018). Using this lens of
focus and completing an analysis of the results could highlight any trends in the interviews to
help identify any recurring issues that need to be addressed by the Final Mile Delivery
Department.
Definitions
Organizational culture refers to the values, beliefs, and behavioral patterns that form the
core identity of an organization (Leisanyane & Khaola, 2013).
Retention is the act of retaining something (Merriam-Webster, 2023b). Employee
retention is defined as an organization’s ability to keep its employees (Stone, 2014).
Employee turnover is defined as the number of people hired in a period to replace those
leaving or dropping out from the workforce (Merriam-Webster, 2023e). This references the ratio
of employees who stayed at the organization versus those who left the organization.
Expectations are defined as the act or state of expecting or anticipating something
(Merriam-Webster, 2023a)—what employees expect or anticipate as being their normal required
duties at the organization.
11

A salaried manager is defined as someone with fixed compensation paid regularly for
their services (Merriam-Webster, 2023d).
An hourly employee is defined as someone who is paid based on the hours they work
(Merriam-Webster, 2023b).
Self-efficacy is defined as the personal judgments of one’s capabilities regarding whether
they will be successful in each situation (Bandura, 1997).
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 provided the context for the
problem, importance of the need to study it, and an overview of the theoretical framework.
Chapter 2 covers the literature review and conceptual framework of this dissertation. Chapter 3
covers the methodology by which this research was conducted. Chapter 4 features an analysis of
the findings from this research. Finally, Chapter 5 offers recommendations for the organization
based on the analysis of the research data.

12

Chapter Two: Literature Review
This chapter reviews organizational culture and how it affects the retention of managers.
The focus is on the influences of communication, opportunities for professional growth, regional
management, and human resources on retention and role clarity, current retention trends, and
organizational commitment. The final section discusses the conceptual framework of social
cognitive theory and other theories that framed the study and informed the analysis of collected
data.
Manager Retention
Organizational culture is defined as the values, beliefs, and behavioral patterns that form
the core identity of an organization (Leisanyane & Khaola, 2013). An organization’s culture can
create boundaries in the internal context of the organization that can influence employees’ work
outcomes (Lopez-Martin & Topa, 2019). Organizational culture that is affected by negative
working conditions can influence an employee’s desire to stay with the organization (Leisanyane
& Khaola, 2013). Multiple factors can affect the organization’s culture in either a positive or
negative way. Kontoghiorghes (2016) found a direct correlation between high-performing
organizational culture and the organization’s ability to retain its employees. The author stated
that a high-performing organizational culture had high job motivation, job satisfaction, and
organization satisfaction with its employees. Other factors the author found to affect high
performance cultures were respect, integrity, open communication, and a quality driven culture.
The author linked all these factors to effective talent management in an organization, including
retention and talent attraction, as keys to ensuring organizations have high performance cultures.
The author noted that without employee retention, it would be difficult for organizations to
maintain a high-performing organizational culture. This illustrates how important retaining
13

employees is to maintain a positive culture at an organization. In this section, the focus is on how
communication, a clear path to career growth, regional management and human resources, and
role clarity can affect employee retention at an organization.
To fully understand high-performing organizational culture, it is important to define this
concept. Kontoghiorghes (2016) defined organizations with high-performing culture as ones that
develop the type of culture that allows effective coping strategies for strategic trends while at the
same time attracting and retaining a talented, motivated, and committed workforce. The author’s
definition is open to interpretation because it is not easy to describe a high-performing culture in
all the different industries and workforces around the world. Each organization needs to develop
a culture in which their employees will want to work. Kontoghiorghes (2016) also described
eight characteristics that these high-performance cultures should have: change-driven,
technology-driven, quality-driven, effective knowledge management, support for creativity, open
communication, and core values of respect and integrity. This study illustrated how creating the
right culture and environment for employees can help organizations retain their employees, in
turn creating a high-performance organizational culture.
Positive organizational culture is also helpful to various aspects of the organization.
Companies with a positive organization culture tend to focus on rewarding their employees by
creating an atmosphere where employees develop their skills and operate at their full potential
(Robbins & Judge, 2012). Positive organizational culture is also connected to the adaptability of
the employee, which is important in environments where change is consistent (Parent &
Lovelace, 2018). The author also found that a positive organizational culture aids employee
engagement because in that environment, employees feel supported. Parent and Lovelace also
found that the key to making change a positive experience was continuous engagement so that
14

when change occurs, the employee is not as affected as when management does not engage with
them. If organizations foster a positive culture, their employees will be more engaged in the
workplace and therefore, better able to manage an environment of constant change.
Organizational culture can also affect an employee’s personal life. Sok et al. (2014)
found that supportive and innovative cultures had a strong positive correlation with a positive
work–home balance. The authors also found that supportive cultures functioned as a buffer
between the strain that is put on the employee at work and in their personal life. They found that
employees working in an innovative environment that was flexible allowed for a positive
relationship between the increased amount of time the employee had to work and their personal
time. This flexibility was defined as creating an organizational culture that allowed employees to
have flexible arrangements to work from home and encouraged employees to prioritize their
home obligations over work obligations (Sok et al., 2014). The authors found that these types of
expectations from the organization created a supportive culture for the employees and allowed
them to have work–life balance, which is important to overall employee well-being.
Communication
Supportive communication from supervisors has a direct positive effect on employee’s
intent to remain in their current position (Kim & Lee, 2009). Kim and Lee (2009) found that
supervisor communication serves a critical role in reducing job-related stress. Their study also
found a direct correlation between clear supervisory communication on job relevance, which
helped improve employee performance when present. The authors also found a correlation
between high turnover rates when that clear communication was not present for employees.
Communication is important to the overall understanding of what is happening in the
organization. Ensuring that there is effective communication between the employee and
15

supervisor also increases their confidence, which in turn, reduces turnover intent (Kim & Lee,
2009).
Communication is especially important in times of change. In a study by de Leon (2020)
with 350 employees in two banks involved in a merger, there was a strong correlation between
the lack of communication by the management team and turnover intention by the employees.
The author also found that the more management explained the change process and steps that
might need to be taken, the employees were more likely to stay at the organization because they
understood the process. They also noted that poor top-down communication left employees with
feelings of uncertainty, negative emotions, and dissatisfaction with their role. De Leon (2020)
also found that these feelings led employees to try to find a different coping mechanism, which
often involved starting to look for another position outside of the organization or leaving the
organization completely. This illustrates how a lack of communication can negatively impact an
employee’s experience in an organization and change their perspective on whether they should
remain in the organization.
Opportunities for Professional Growth
The lack of a clear path to promotion and the opportunity for career development and
growth is among the top reasons that managers leave their position (Longenecker & Fink, 2014).
Employees want to know that the organization has opportunities to develop their skills and that
there is a clear path for career development in the organization. Career development and growth
do not necessarily mean promotion; it could also mean lateral transfers to positions with a better
fit. Verbruggen and van Emmerik (2020) completed a study of 342 employees about their current
satisfaction levels with their position. They found a positive correlation between employees who
had opportunities for either internal promotions or transfers to a better position and their current
16

job satisfaction (Verbruggen & van Emmerik, 2020). They also found a negative correlation
between employees who did not change positions or get promotions with current levels of job
satisfaction and the desire to leave their current role (Verbruggen & van Emmerik, 2020). This
shows how the opportunities to develop the employees’ skills are critical to retaining them in the
organization.
Another area of career development that might affect retention is role stagnation. Role
stagnation is defined as the feeling of being stuck in a current role relative to the opportunity for
career progress (Kunte et al., 2017). In Kunte et al.’s (2017) study of junior-level managers, they
found a positive correlation between role stagnation and job dissatisfaction, which led to
increased intent to leave the organization. That study focused on whether employees felt they
had a clear path for career development, that management that cared about their growth and
progression, and whether they felt they were being prepared for promotional opportunities
(Kunte et al., 2017). They also found an inverse relationship between the answers of junior-level
managers and senior-level managers because senior-level management had experienced
promotions and understood there was less opportunity to gain experience as you get higher up
the ladder (Kunte et al., 2017). Ensuring that lower-level management is an area of focus for
career development can ensure job satisfaction at those levels and lower employee retention.
Regional Management and Human Resources Influence on Retention
Incompetent managers have been proven to cause employees to start seeing other
positions as more attractive, leading to higher turnover (Leisanyane & Khaola, 2013). Lower-
level managers and employees look for upper management to ensure that they have all the tools
necessary to complete their job. As organizations grow, so do their internal structure and
reporting ladders. Organizations tend to create regions in their company to help better facilitate
17

growth and understanding of their specific market. Regional leaders then set the tone for their
teams and make sure that everyone in their region is on the same page. Regional management
and human resources departments play important roles in the overall influence on management
retention. Managerial support is an integral part of the employee’s experience in the
organization. De Leon (2020) found that as managerial support in an organization increased, the
turnover intent among employees decreased. In a large-scale study of 9,301 employees, Tymon
et al. (2011) found that managerial support had a significant direct impact on employees
retention 1 year later. Regional managers are seen as guides for employees, which is why their
actions and behaviors affect employees’ perceptions. Celebrating milestones, empowerment, and
acknowledging employee contributions are some factors that employees looked for from top
management (Tymon et al., 2011).
The human resources department also plays an important part in contributing to a positive
experience for employees. In Tymon et al.’s (2011) study, they found that human resources
managers can reduce turnover by providing better managerial support, holding employees
accountable, and providing enhanced career development tools. When human resources leaders
accomplish these items, they set the tone for the expectations that all employees and managers
have going forward by improving intrinsic rewards (Tymon et al., 2011).
Role Clarity
To define what an employee brings to the workforce, it is important to define what
characterizes their role (Raftery, 2016). Role clarity is important in making sure that employees
know what is expected of them. A lack of role clarity is likely to lead to role ambiguity for
employees of organizations (Mafuba et al., 2015). The authors also illustrated how role
ambiguity can cause role conflict, role stress, and role overload. They also noted that this role
18

ambiguity can lead to job dissatisfaction. Monsen and Wayne Boss (2009) studied the
relationship between role ambiguity and managers’ intent to quit. The authors found a strong
positive correlation between increases in role ambiguity for managers and increased intent to quit
their jobs. This illustrates a need to better clarify roles for employees and ensure they understand
the expectations of upper management. Monsen and Wayne Boss (2009) also found that
organizations that have environments that foster elevated levels of risk taking also added
ambiguity to their roles. Their study also noted the difference between innovation and risk taking
by managers. The authors defined risk taking as a tendency to take bold actions outside of the
normal realm of operation, such as entering a new market. They defined innovation as the
willingness to support creativity in the organization and experiment with developing new
processes. They found that innovation in the workplace did not cause an increase in role
ambiguity like risk taking did. This is because risk taking has more uncertainty when it comes to
the future and how it will affect the organization, whereas innovation allows current teams to use
their creativity to develop innovative ideas. Creating this separation can help organizations
understand that although some risk taking is needed for them to be innovative, limiting the
effects of risk taking on management is important to retaining employees.
Another area that role clarity can affect is stress, which can lead to employees wanting to
leave their position. Role stress is typically associated with increased tension, decreased job
satisfaction, and increased intent of employees to leave (Monsen & Wayne Boss, 2009). When
roles are ambiguous, it puts a lot of pressure on employees to figure out what is required of them,
which adds to the tension in the workplace. When managerial roles are not carefully designed, it
leads to increased stress and poor job performance (Monsen & Wayne Boss, 2009). This
increased stress will lead employees to look for other places to work. This is directly connected
19

to the previous factor regarding how risk taking, and innovation affect role clarity in an
organization. If organizations do not separate these factors and instead confuse risk taking with
innovation, the literature illustrates that they will see increased turnover. Organizations that focus
on innovation and proactiveness, which is defined as opportunity seeking or a forward-looking
perspective, have been shown to improve the retention of their employees (Monsen & Wayne
Boss, 2009).
Current Retention Trends and Organizational Commitment
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2022a), voluntary employee separation
from their organization had increased to 3.4% per month in November 2021, a continued upward
trend of employee separation during the last 10 years, from a prior average of 1.5%. These
statistics are consistent with continued media reporting of what is called the Great Resignation.
This resignation can be seen across the private and public sector, as illustrated by the increased
voluntary resignations in the United States. A study by Sheather and Slattery (2021) in the
medical industry found that 21% of doctors were currently thinking about quitting their jobs. The
respondents to that study cited increased workload causing burnout, lack of supplies, and the
current work environment. Although few scholarly studies have been completed on this topic,
initial studies point to both tech and medical as the two biggest industries affected by voluntary
resignation (Cook, 2021). The age range of 30 to 45 seems to be the most impacted, with
resignations in those groups increasing 20%, whereas other age groups are seeing reduced
numbers (Cook, 2021). These numbers should cause organizations to look internally at how they
can improve overall retention for themselves.
Multiple factors can affect retention in an organization. Organizations need to understand
their workforce and adjust their style to match. Thompson and Gregory (2012) found that if
20

organizations are going to be successful, they need to adjust their leadership and management
style to complement the work styles of their employees. They found that this was particularly
evident among their younger employees, who had more specific needs than their older peers.
Thompson and Gregory also found that these factors helped improve retention of their younger
employees, including spending time on cultivating meaningful relationships with their
employees; engaging employees with behavior that leads to building mutual trust; having a
coaching approach that focuses on development, growth, and decision making; and ensuring that
each employee has individual plans tailored to them. These four points highlighted by the
authors helped improve retention in the organization because the employees felt that the
organization was meeting their needs. This is also important to note because the study was
focused on Millennials, who tend to be lower to middle managers at organizations, who were the
focus of their research.
A consistent theme in the literature seems to be that managerial support is necessary to
ensure that employees are satisfied and want to stay (Thompson & Gregory, 2012; Tymon et al.,
2011). Managers have higher chances of retaining their employees when showing personal
interest in and commitment to them (Tymon et al., 2011). The authors also found a need for
consistent career discussions between managers and their employees because they found a strong
correlation between career success and employees’ intent to leave. Other areas that they found
needed more focus were acknowledging contributions as they happen, empowering their
employees, and celebrating their milestones as ways to ensure that they felt the personal interest
and commitment by upper management to their employees. When employees feel that their
organization is committed to them, they will typically feel a sense of job satisfaction in their
current position and be more likely to stay with the organization. Organizational commitment to
21

employees when it comes to these factors involves creating a culture of caring and support for
their employees. These are the type of environments in which employees want to work and grow.
Social Cognitive Theory
People live in a social ecosystem and are affected by the behaviors and environment in
which they live (Bandura, 2005). Social cognitive theory focuses on the three interrelated factors
that influence that ecosystem: personal, behavioral, and environmental (Bandura, 2012). The
theory is focused on the idea that these three determinants influence the actions that any given
person will take (Bandura, 2012). The environmental determinant refers to our surroundings that
influence our actions, with organizational culture as an example that can be either imposed,
constructed, or selected (Bandura, 2012). Behavioral determinants are the actions that we see
others take, such as managers or role models, and how they affect the decisions we make
ourselves (Bandura, 2012). Personal determinants are our experiences and opinions and how they
affect our actions (Bandura, 2012). This study examined how managers’ expectations when it
comes to role clarity, communication, opportunities for professional growth, regional and human
resources managers, and work–life balance can affect these determinants and influence their
decision making.
As a result of these three co-determinants, human actions become a product of the
interplay between intrapersonal influences, the behaviors that individuals engage in, and the
environmental forces that affect them (Bandura, 2012). The first area of focus of this study was
the environmental determinants at Shipping Direct in the Final Mile Delivery Department and if
the organizational culture affected managers’ decisions to leave the organization. The second
area of focus is how the organizational culture affected the behaviors of managers who used to
work at Shipping Direct and whether those behaviors demonstrated in the organization affected
22

why the managers left the organization. The environmental and behavioral determinants in an
organization can affect the personal experience at an organization either negatively or positively.
Through interviewing the managers and focusing on these two areas, the results can highlight
any trends that could have caused negative individual experiences and if those experiences were
indicators as to why the employees no longer work for the organization.
The organizational culture, based on my experience as a manager at Shipping Direct in
the Final Mile Delivery Department, is fast-paced and continuously changing. At the time these
employees worked at this organization, prior to this study, the growth rate outpaced the available
human resources staffing, leaving one human resources manager to cover multiple sites at once.
Regional managers also cover whole states, with more than 15 sites at times. All these factors
could have created inconsistent communication when it came to role clarity and the promotion
process at Shipping Direct. Employees’ experiences at any organization are important to the
overall success of the organization. With the new workforce putting an elevated level of
importance on organizational culture, addressing any issues that help improve it can reduce
retention overall (Saeed at al., 2018). The interplay of these three determinants can also damage
the self-efficacy of the managers. Self-efficacy is defined as the personal judgements of one’s
capabilities on whether they will be successful in each situation (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy is
influenced by the performance of employees, vicarious experiences, forms of social persuasion,
and physiological indicators (Bandura, 1997). This illustrates how self-efficacy can influence the
choices of managers and the goals that they set for themselves (Elliot et al., 2017). These
concepts helped guide the research to determine whether the three determinants influenced the
managers’ self-efficacy and caused them to look for other positions outside of their organization.
23

Summary
This chapter discusses the varied factors that can affect an organization’s culture and
decrease retention. The topics covered in the chapter included organizational culture,
communication, opportunities for professional growth, regional management and human
resources influences on retention and role clarity, current retention trends, and organizational
commitment. Then, the conceptual framework of social cognitive theory and how it helped guide
the study was discussed. The next chapter covers the study methodology.

24

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to highlight factors in Shipping Direct’s organizational
culture that can affect its ability to retain managers. This chapter covers the research questions
that the study sought to answer. Then, it provides an overview of the study design, researcher,
data sources, and validity and reliability. The chapter finishes with a discussion of ethics,
limitations, and delimitations.
Research Questions
1. What environmental factors facilitated the decision of former managers at Levels 4 to
6 in the Final Mile Delivery Department to seek other employment opportunities?
2. What suggestions do former managers at Levels 4 to 6 in the Final Mile Delivery
Department have to improve the culture at the organization?
Overview of Design
This study was completed using qualitative methods. Qualitative research designs allow
for more flexibility in questions asked and the ability to be adjusted based on the answers of the
participants (Locke et al., 2010). The data was collected by completing semi structured
interviews with previous managers at Levels 4 to 6 in Shipping Direct’s Final Mile Delivery
Department. Qualitative interviews allow for interview topics to emerge during conversations
because they are open ended (Morgan, 2014). Interviews also allow the interviewer to listen to
the interpretations and perspectives of the interviewee (Morgan, 2014). Open-ended interview
questions also allow for data to be collected on a range of factors related to the topic in both
depth and detail (Morgan, 2014). Because this study focused on the experiences of managers at
Levels 4 to 6, having open-ended questions and the ability to probe based on what came up in the
interview allowed for a more inquisitive approach to data collection. Structured data collection
25

techniques limit the findings of the study to the themes listed, whereas this open-ended nature of
interview questions allows any factors to come up.
Research Setting
The study was completed with managers at Levels 4 to 6 who worked in the Final Mile
Delivery Department of the organization Shipping Direct between 2015 and 2020. These
managers worked in a warehouse-type environment and were responsible for sorting Shipping
Direct packages into ZIP codes and then loading them into vans for delivery to the customers.
The purpose of these warehouses was to speed up delivery times to customers by creating
localized buildings in high concentration areas and have third party carriers deliver the packages
in that local area to the warehouse. Level 4 managers worked either the dispatch morning shift to
depart the drivers or the afternoon shift when the drivers returned. The Level 5 managers worked
the night sortation shift that organized the packages. Level 6 managers owned ensuring that the
sortation, dispatch, and driver return shifts operated efficiently and effectively.
The target group of interviewees was 20 employees in the Level 4 to 6 range at the
organization that left voluntarily. All 20 of the employees worked in one of these warehouses for
a minimum of 1 year. The study was limited to ex-employees because the organization did not
provide approval to interview any current employees. The length of tenure that the target group
had at the organization was between 2 and 7 years. The target group did not all solely only work
in the Final Mile Delivery Department, some of them worked at other departments either before
or after their tenure in the Final Mile Delivery Department.
The Researcher
I am currently employed at Shipping Direct and have been there for over 7 years. I
worked with all the participants in some capacity when they worked at the organization in the
26

Final Mile Delivery Department. I used to work in the department but currently work in another
department that at times works closely with parts of the Final Mile Delivery Department. I am
currently a Level 6 manager but started at the organization at Level 5. None of the participants
worked directly for me in the past, but they were peers in different buildings or on different
projects. I went through a 2-year process to get promoted at the organization from Level 5 to
Level 6. The promotion experience was extremely negative for me and was among the reasons I
chose to leave that department. I am a people manager first and focused on the development and
growth of my team and peers. I have divorced parents and was raised by a single parent, aunts
and uncles who were truly kind, and grandparents that would do anything to help support me.
Kindness and taking care of others was at the root of my upbringing and something that I hold
dear to my heart. I feel that as a manager, my duty is to take care of my family of workers in the
same way. I always see my team as my family. I need to understand their needs and do anything
I need to make sure they are successful, even if that means I lose that person from my team, but
they go to where they are happy.
These experiences presented bias and assumptions during this study that I have about
what the issues might be in that department. Because I have experienced the lack of
communication, lack of role clarity, and lack of clear path for career growth, that created bias or
assumptions that others might have had the same experiences. Another bias that occurred is that I
have worked in some capacity with the list of participants who received invitations. I mitigated
the bias by taking a nonjudgmental, sensitive, and respectful approach during the interviews
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I strived to be neutral when asking the questions and used an
interview guide that had been vetted beforehand by the Internal Review Board to ensure the
questions were not leading (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The questions were worded in a way to
27

portray both rapport and neutrality so that my opinions were not present in them (Patton, 2002).
Doing so helped mitigate any assumptions or biases in the interviews.
Data Sources
The data sources for this study were interviews. The interviews were completed with
former Shipping Direct managers between Levels 4 and 6 at the time they were employed in the
organization. The interviews were approximately one hour long and were completed using Zoom
videoconferencing technology.
Interviews are a data collection method in which an interviewer asks questions of an
interviewee (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). The interview questions were semi structured, which
is defined as an interview with some structured questions to start and guide the interview, which
allows flexibility to explore issues that arise during the questioning (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Having open-ended questions also allows the participants to increase their understanding of their
perspectives, beliefs, and interpretations (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). Open-ended questions
can also allow the person conducting the interviews to concentrate on the context of the
questions and get more specific when needed through probing questions (Johnson & Christensen,
2015).
The interviews were completed over Zoom with participants using video. Most
participants did not live in the same area at the time of the interviews and were based
internationally. Having the interviews on Zoom allowed for flexibility for the interviewees and
the convenience of not having to meet anywhere. This was also helpful because COVID-19 case
numbers were on the rise at that time of data collection (May 2021) and Zoom allowed for a
safer experience for the participants and researcher. Having the camera on allowed for the in-
person touch that otherwise would not be available because the interviews were not in person.
28

The interviews were completed on a one-to-one basis to allow for freedom of expression and
avoid concerns about others knowing the interviewee’s opinion. It helped protect the
confidentiality of the interviewee and allowed more comfort in sharing any intricate details. Due
to the topic of study, the research questions required a comfort level with the managers being
interviewed so that they felt safe providing the information accurately and honestly to the
interviewer. In addition, the informed consent the participants agreed to also noted that they did
not have to answer every question and could stop the interview at any time.
Participants
The participant criteria for inclusion for the study was managers at Levels 4 to 6 who
were previously employed at Shipping Direct but left the organization voluntarily. I used a
unique purposeful inclusion approach because the participants had unique and specific
characteristics, which was their specific experience as managers at Levels 4 to 6 who voluntarily
left the department (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Twenty participants were recruited in total.
Through my LinkedIn network, I was able to search my connections and identify these 20
participants that I knew had left the organization to pursue other opportunities. The participants
that were identified were previous colleagues at Shipping Direct that collaborated with me
during my time in the Final Mile Delivery Department. These 20 participants all fit the criteria of
my study. The criteria were that they worked at the organization in the last 5 years. They were
managers at Levels 4 to 6 at the time of employment. They worked in the Final Mile Delivery
Department of the organization for at least 6 months in their tenure at the organization. Finally,
they had to leave the organization voluntarily and were not released. Although 20 invites were
sent to the target participants, only 15 participants responded to the invites to ask for more
information. The five who did not respond received three messages, all 1 week apart, seeking a
29

response. Five of the 15 other potential participants were not interested in participating due to not
wanting to share any personal information about their time there.
The remaining ten people agreed to participate in the study. One of these participants
shared with me right before the interview that they had been about to go on a development plan
and had the option of either staying through the development plan or resigning with a severance.
This participant chose to take the severance, and due to this information, I canceled the interview
to ensure all participants voluntarily resigned. Participants that went on a development plan
could have had a more negative bias as well, which was another reason for canceling this
interview. Thus, nine interviews were completed. During one of the interviews I completed, the
participant originally told me they voluntarily left but afterward revealed that they had received
the same option of either resigning with a severance or being put on a development plan. Due to
this revelation, I excluded their interview from the analysis of the paper because they had a much
more negative and personal experience than the remaining participants and to ensure consistency
with the data collected. The remaining eight participants helped answer the research questions
because their experience in this department caused them to look for employment outside the
organization.
Data Collection Procedures
The data collection procedure involved completing interviews over Zoom for all the
participants. The participants all lived in different states and time zones, so this allowed
consistency. The interviews were between 45 and 90 minutes long to ensure that the participants
had ample time, and interviews occurred at the pace of the participant. The interviews were
recorded and transcribed, given all participants agreed to recording. Strengths of completing
Zoom interviews were that the researcher was not tied down geographically, and they allowed
30

more comfort and flexibility, ensuring the maximum number of participants possible (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). The interview protocol in Appendix A features the 23 main interview questions
with probes based on the questions. The interview protocol was designed to answer the two
research questions in this study and was based on the literature discussed in Chapter 2.
Data Analysis
Category Construction
The first step in the data analysis process was to construct categories. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) listed category construction as the first step in analyzing qualitative data. This
process included reading the transcripts from the completed interviews and making notations
next to information deemed to be interesting. This process of making notations of interesting
items in the transcripts is also called coding, and because the researcher should be open to all
ideas at this point, it is also called open coding (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). After coding the first
transcript, the researcher moved on to the second transcript doing the same, but also looking for
common themes or categories throughout. Merriam and Tisdell also suggested continuously
referencing the purpose of the study when coding and connecting it to the framework of the
study to help keep the codes relevant.
Sorting Categories and Naming
After the coding was completed for all transcripts, the next step was to sort them into
categories and name them. Each time a code is placed into a category, it is important to include
all original identifying codes such as the respondent’s name and line number in the transcript so
that it can be easily referenced when needed (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The authors also stated
that it is important to note that at this stage, the process should be inductive while working
through the transcripts and sorting the categories. After the data stops producing new categories
31

and the categories start to take shape, the researcher should move to a more deductive process.
Then when naming the categories, I referenced my findings in the literature and linked them to
the names, which Merriam and Tisdell stated connects the names to the purpose of the study
while creating mutually exclusive and conceptually congruent themes.
Linking Categories to the Theoretical Framework
Once the categories were created, sorted, and named, I then connected the major
categories to the theoretical framework of the study. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) contended that
theorizing the data in this manner allows the researcher to draw inferences from the collected
data to help address the purpose of the study.
Validity and Reliability
To ensure that the research was valid and reliable, I implemented multiple checks to
ensure consistent results during the data collection process. To begin, the participant invitations
were sent only to employees who had voluntarily left the organization and were not fired or let
go to ensure there was no bias when it came to their responses. To ensure that there was internal
validity, I completed member checks. Members checks are defined as taking the preliminary
analysis and emerging findings from the study to a select group of participants to ensure that the
interpretation of the findings is accurate (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). By completing this, I
ensured that my bias did not affect my interpretation of the data. Another form of validity I used
to ensure that the data were reliable was completing an audit trail. An audit trail describes in
detail how the data were collected, how the categories were formed, and how the findings were
interpreted (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This ensured that the readers of the study understood how
the findings came about and determined what the decision process looked like. Being detailed
32

with the data collection process and analysis while completing these two validations ensured
internal validity and reliability.
Ethics
To ensure that this study was ethical, I followed Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) 12-item
ethical issues checklist. I started by ensuring that the participants understood what the study was
about by providing a brief description of the purpose of the study and the research questions I
was looking to answer. I explained to the participants why this study was important and how
their participation would help me gather valuable perspectives due to their experiences at the
organization. The next three points in the checklist cover promises, risk assessment, and
confidentiality. I assured them they knew that their data would be confidential, with no names
being listed in the final data reported. I also ensured they knew that this interview was voluntary,
with no pressure at any time if they changed their mind and did not want to participate anymore.
I ensured they knew that only I would have access to these data, which would be on my
password-locked personal laptop to which no one else has access. I ensured that the interviews
were done at a time that worked best for the participants and verified again at the time of the
interview that they still wanted to complete this interview. I shared with them the institutional
review board process that my university employs to ensure that all questions are ethical, legal,
and cause no harm to the participant. The main theme I prioritized during the participant
selection and interview process was complete transparency to ensure that both the participants
and I were protected.

33

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this study was to identify which factors in Shipping Direct’s
organizational culture might influence the organization’s ability to retain its managers. The
guiding questions for this research were as follows:
1. What environmental factors facilitated the decision of former managers at Levels 4 to
6 in the Final Mile Delivery Department to seek other employment opportunities?
2. What suggestions do former managers at Levels 4 to 6 in the Final Mile Delivery
Department have to improve the culture at the organization?
During this study, the interviews completed by the participants all had similar and
consistent themes of what caused them to look elsewhere for employment. The themes for what
facilitated their decision to leave were a performance driven organizational culture, lack of
communication, and opportunities for professional growth. The themes of what the department
could do to help this culture were connected to their reasons for leaving: improve the
unsupportive climate, improve communication, streamline opportunities for professional growth,
and improve role clarity. The findings, although consistent among the participants, were unique
to each participant’s situation. Because all the participants worked at differing sites in the Final
Mile Delivery Department at Shipping Direct, the situations were different, but they could all be
connected back to the same themes as the other participants. Through the qualitative interviews
and the process of validating the data with the participants after the analysis, the connection to
the themes was established to ensure the reliability of the findings.
The participants of the interviews worked for Shipping Direct between 2013 and 2020.
Their tenure at the organization ranged between 1.5 and 7.5 years. The names used in this section
34

are pseudonyms to protect the identities of the participants. Table 2 details the tenure and job
levels of all participants while at the Final Mile Delivery Department at Shipping Direct.

Table 2
Participant Tenure Information
Employee Tenure Level at start Level at departure
John 1.5 years Level 5 Level 5
Clark 5.5 years Level 5 Level 6
David 4.5 years Level 5 Level 7
Daniel 5 years Level 3 Level 4
Bruce 7.5 years Level 5 Level 7
Cristina 4 years Level 4 Level 5
Elliot 6 years Level 1 Level 4
Maria 5.5 years Level 4 Level 5

35

Research Question 1: What Environmental Factors Facilitated the Decision of Former
Managers at Levels 4 to 6 in the Final Mile Delivery Department to Seek Other
Employment Opportunities?
Negative Organizational Culture
Organizational culture that was numbers driven and focused on performance over the
person was the largest theme during the interviews. Leisanyane and Khaola (2013) defined
organizational culture as the values, beliefs, and behavioral patterns that form the core identity of
an organization. All participants in the study said organizational culture in some form affected
their decision to seek other employment opportunities outside the organization. In organization
culture, three subcategories were uncovered to help organize the data: performance, work–life
balance, and environment.
Performance
Performance was one subtheme identified in organizational culture. This was identified
by all eight participants as a general focus on performance metrics and numbers in the
organization that was deeply embedded into the culture of Shipping Direct. One of the
participants, David, experienced it as a focus on the performance metrics that were tied to a
monetary value above all things at the organization, even when the metrics were flawed. David
stated:
Shipping Direct having these metrics that were like—they were so important, and then
always dollars attached to it, which is, which is fine, that’s, it’s a business, it’s meant to
make money and that’s what’s supposed to happen, but sometimes those measurements,
they were they weren’t good measure measurements, either because they’re being
measured poorly. They did not, they were not calibrated right, so there is, like, a number
36

of factors—like, you would have this number that would represent an output each day,
for example, whatever that number is.
David perceived that these metrics also had flaws and were not accurate in measuring the
performance of the Final Mile Delivery Department in the organization. The problem with these
numbers was that at times, the managers would be negatively held responsible for these poor
measures. David later stated that, “you’d see leaders getting core performance reviews at these
buildings when really it wasn’t their fault.” David stated that this put a lot of pressure on
managers and created a lot of negativities in the work environment. Creating this type of
accountability based on metrics that were perceived as flawed also had other negative effects.
The Level 4 to 6 managers also shared that there was a perceived focus on the performance
numbers of the department over the people. Daniel noted:
I think it all can be resolved if there is just a level of decency and humanity that can be
brought back into the workplace, I think, trying to always do what we can to, like you
know, hit a number—this, this, this number that just continuously grows. It is just
counterproductive of keeping a happy and productive work environment long term, so I
think actually scaling back about actually reasonable numbers in order for everybody, in
order to get a paycheck at the end of the day, but I think just constantly, that constantly
raising the bar, raises the bar. You can only raise it so much before you really start to,
like, burn the oil in the engine. So, I think being realistic of, like, what, what are actually,
like, goals I, that I can actually be hit and a profit, without really did jeopardizing the
whole of humanity and vibe of an operation.
Creating a number-centric environment like this was perceived as removing the human
element in the operation, which in turn created a negative environment, according to Daniel. This
37

type of environment also created an ultracompetitive nature among the managers. With everyone
focused on hitting their performance numbers, they ended up competing with one another over
these performance numbers. Daniel also noted:
Competition—I hate it. I, I’m, I’m not the big—I’m not the most competitive person, but
I cannot stand the most engagement between shifts is, “We have to be better than them,”
and, and, and that creates such a toxic environment, because not a lot of people really
take it serious, like, I don’t get, like, like, some of us it sees it as friendly.
He described this competition among the managers as creating unhealthy relationships.
This created an environment where the focus was hitting the performance numbers and not the
mental pressure and stress that this type of environment created. Clark stated that his direct
manager “focused a little bit too much on specific metrics rather than the people.” Cristina noted
that this type of environment put a lot of pressure on the employees: “You know, because things
have such strict time deadlines, there’s certain way that people conduct themselves when they’re
under stress, so I would say there was definitely a lot of stress within the teams.” Maria also
noticed that lack of human element with the performance measures at the organization:
There was not a lot of, like, gray area or, like, human perceptions of, like, performance. It
was very much, like, well, you got like handed the worst possible day but, like, your
numbers are worse than, like, other people is this week, so you’re worse, so I think the
pressure was also, like, very much from, like, a constantly being measured, like, very
quantitatively.
Maria reported her view that the managers’ perception was that their performance was
purely based on the performance numbers and only quantitative in nature. There was no human
element in measuring the managers’ performance. This type of environment was noted by all
38

eight participants in the interviews. All of them noted that this type of culture could be perceived
as toxic and created unhealthy relationships between the managers and the department, driven by
these performance numbers. The participants reported that this continuous pressure on them to
reach these performance goals at all costs meant it came at the cost of their mental stress. This
was listed as a major reason that participants started looking outside the organization for other
positions. They wanted to get away and go to a place that did not put numbers over people.
Work–Life Balance
The second subtheme uncovered during the research was a lack of work–life balance in
the department. One area that participants shared that created this lack of work–life balance was
the lack of manager coverage for vacations. All participants noted that there was only one
manager per shift assigned, which meant anytime someone needed to have time off, the other
manager would have to cover for them. Bruce noted, “So, you never took any time. You just net
zero time because you know, you, you take time off and then you cover for someone else that he
did, then you cover for someone else.” The zero-sum time off he referenced was the fact that
when managers wanted to have time off, they would be required to ask their counterpart on the
opposite shift to cover their shift for them. Bruce explained the schedules were built with one
manager working the front half of the week, Sunday to Wednesday, and the second manager
working the back half, which was Wednesday to Saturday. So, if the front-half manager
requested a week off, the back half manager would work 8 days straight to cover both their shift
and the front-half manager’s shift. The returning front-half manager would then work 7 to 8 days
straight to give the back-half manager time off to balance out the shifts. Daniel noted:
39

[It is] good we [Shipping Direct] made $60 billion this year, we cannot do, like, $50
million, but we have all our workers, a little bit happier they get a little bit more time off,
we actually show a little bit more appreciation.
Daniel described the same problem with taking time off due to the shift structure. Maria
also noted that, “We don’t even have, like, cover for, like, vacation so, like, if someone left, like,
that just meant everyone was going to be pushed to their limits for an undetermined amount of
time.” Participants noted this as putting a lot of pressure on the managers. The sarcasm
illustrated by Daniel and Maria was indicative of the frustration they faced during this time
working at Shipping Direct, specifically when the company was making a lot of profit, yet the
managers struggled to take time off.
To add to the lack of ability to take time off, there was a perception that managers had to
work 50 or more hours, or they were not dedicated to their position. Bruce noted:
A couple people on my team who, you know, work life is very important to them—they
want to work 40 hours and that’s it, but they’re very good at what they did, and I found
myself defending them in reviews, because the perception was that they were not, you
know, top tier whatever, but it’s not because they weren’t hitting their numbers but
because, you know, they work 40 hours.
Working a standard shift and a 40-hour work week were perceived not being committed
to the role and at times seen as low performance. Maria noted how working extra hours was
perceived as being “committed,” even if the shift was over: “If things weren’t done and your
shift was ending, like, if you are willing to stay for hours of overtime either and you just worked
overnight, like, then you’re very successful.” David also noted this behavior: “I saw, like, this
culture of, like, doing more hours is healthy, and it’s not.” Sok et al. (2014) noted that a lack of
40

support for the work–home balance of the employee resulted in a negative impact to their mental
well-being. These data show that the lack of ability to take time off and expectations to work
long hours put a lot of pressure on the employee’s well-being. Bruce noted that there was always
this lingering fear in the workplace that if the managers were not committed and did not put in
arduous work, there were going to be unfavorable results for the managers, as he noted using the
phrase “or else”:
We went to Pennsylvania one time to visit a [family friend] home and meet her family
and stuff. She [family friend] was an associate [at Shipping Direct] and keep it at the best
that I have ever heard it. [The company slogan should have been] It is work hard, have
fun, make history, or else and, like, the boss, is the monster under the table, right? Like, if
you do not do that, it is not that we want to work really hard and take care of each other
and do those things. It is that if you do not work hard, have fun, make history, like, you
will not be successful.
To clarify Bruce’s comment, the company slogan is “Work hard, have fun, and make
history.” His friend felt like there needed to be an “or else” at the end of that slogan to reiterate
the expectations of consistently working hard. This perception that if they did not work hard all
the time, they would end up on the low performing list puts a lot of pressure on the managers, as
Bruce stated.
All participants agreed that there was no perception that if employees worked hard, they
would be rewarded with time off to unwind and relax. They faced constant pressure from all
directions, as Elliot noted: “I guess you could say work–life balance, which is like a super big
no-no for Shipping Direct culture, work–life harmony, if you want to be famous about it.” All
participants noted that this type of behavior was detrimental to the overall work pressure that
41

they all felt. All participants noted that this was a major factor in them leaving and something
they looked for in all the new roles to which they apply. Clark noted that “work–life balance was
a 100% the reason why I left.” All participants agreed that this type of behavior was consistent
across all their buildings and that it increased the pressure they felt, leading them to look for
employment outside the organization.
High Expectations for Advancement
The last subtheme discovered under the organizational culture theme was the actual
environment. The data illustrate that the elevated expectations to continuously improve of the
position in this department were always high. Managers at Levels 4 to 6 said that it created a
negative environment for everyone. The managers were expected to conform to this pressure and
continuously promote and move up or risk losing their job, which Elliot noted:
Um, I feel like it could have been better and it’s just me personally, like I said, you know,
it’s a, it’s a move up or move out kind of thing, but the, the—obviously, you own your
own development, there but it’s not really a complete ownership of your development if
you are expected to develop regardless of, you know, obviously, as time goes on,
whatever role you’re in, you’re going to become more proficient at it. You are going to
become better at it and you are doing it, so just as a natural result of performing the
function that you are performing. You know, having that expectation to, like—people
that would want to move up and want to progress in their career, they obviously have that
option, and it’s very welcome, but it would have made it less pressure if they were, like
you know—it’s up to you, your time, and your pace.
This environment of “either move up or move out” that Elliot noted created an
environment where all managers were looking out for themselves and how they could get to the
42

next level. Elliot also noted that it did not foster strong relationships among peers but pitted them
against each other because the other person was your competition and could be the reason they
were not promoted, which is also connected to the performance driven culture that Shipping
Direct had. Men and Robinson (2018) discussed that having a culture of fear negatively affects
an employee’s psychological need for relatedness, which is an essential need to rely on others.
Not having relatedness for employees means they do not feel that they can rely on their
coworkers to complete tasks (Men & Robinson, 2018). Maria noted this, stating that, “even, like,
my own coworkers was all very, like, like, every man for themselves kind of a thing.” Upper
management also knew which people would go above and beyond to get promoted, as Luther
noted:
In these environments is, like, when there’s certain people who are willing to really go
over beyond, especially when they see a difficult situation or circumstance and, and
resolve the issue, no matter what it is—those people tend to get squeezed the most and,
like, I think, I think upper, the upper management realizes that I’ve seen this with
Shipping Direct, and I’ve seen this with other companies. The people who actually care
about the process, they care about the people, when they care about the successes. In a
sense, they know that they can be leaned on, and those people get squeezed the most to
the part where it just leads to burnout.
Luther described an environment where employees who were the best performing got
squeezed to do more, which also added to the competitive nature of the organization’s culture.
Maria noted that management knew which managers could be convinced to do more: “Just, like,
how, like, how much they could get out of your, kind of, was like the measurement, so you’re
willing to do anything, then that was, like, a successful behavior.” Maria and Bruce both
43

indicated that the managers they pushed the most had to either conform to that pressure or end up
also being marked as low performers for not meeting those standards. Top performers felt
pressure to work more and do more, otherwise they would risk losing their job, which Bruce
corroborated:
Um, I think, I think the pressure was to not fail right, and it not so much company
pressure, but like, internally, after the military started this new career supporting my
family, and so, if I failed or if I got fired. Like, how do I support my family? So, my
pressure came more internally at, you know, five times ten times then any, like, job
pressure and once, once I knew that, I knew that I could do the job better than anyone
else, then I knew that I had job security and then, once I had job security, then I could
start innovating and taking risks and making, like, processes better.
Bruce confirmed that the pressure to know more and spend time at the operation to make
sure he learned everything to be a top performer was draining, lowering his job satisfaction.
David also stated that he was expected to always be the best of the best: “I should have the very
top so rates, as well as, like, the highest volume of packages out the door and then that’s success,
you know, delivery success rate as a station manager, like lowest not on van incidents.” All eight
participants noted this as an area of frustration and constant pressure. Maria recalled that other
managers put in a lot of time on their days off to make sure that they stood out from the rest:
“Volunteering to, like, cover someone else’s day off, like, even though you get nothing for it.”
Participant Maria also mentioned a part of the environment that affected only the female
managers, that it was a masculine and man-led group that did not respect the female managers
who worked there. She stated:
44

In my success, I think, like, telling, like, if a heroic story and, like, not voicing any
concerns about problems was by, like, the way to be most successful. So, it is like you do
not really want to be, like, asking for help in any way or like, I am trying to think I mean
there just wasn’t a lot of communication, like, and when there was, it was almost like it,
nothing was, like, a discussion like. I had, like, on my shift, I had like a male counterpart,
and anytime something would go wrong, like, my manager would ask me what happened,
when times were good, he congratulates my male counterpart, the yeah, exactly, um, boys
club.
Maria perceived a double standard for men and women at the department. Every time
something went wrong, it was perceived that the female manager did something wrong and when
it was a success, the male manager did something right, as mentioned in her quote. Cristina also
had the same type of experience in the department: “One, it was a very male-centered
environment, and it was very difficult for us to be, to be frank, it was very difficult to find some
equality in that building and aside from moving up.” She perceived that female managers were
held to a different standard then men. Maria perceived that they had to try much harder not only
to fit in but also to outshine their male counterparts. Maria also noted how women got more
stereotypical tasks:
Well, and then the one important thing was that, like, one of, like, the women had to be
assigned to go get the cupcakes, like, if we needed cupcakes or something of that nature,
like, we had to make sure that there was, like, a female in charge of that for a meeting.
Maria also noted that any communication that was coming from her would also be seen
as a compliant because she was a woman:
45

Exactly, um, boys club, so, yes, like, I think you would—like, communication, like, was
a hindrance to my success. I mean, there were not a lot of positive things to be
communicating as well as, like, of your communicate, you just, like—it is either a
complaint or need for help or something went wrong.
Both Maria and Cristina noted that this was a big reason why they both sought transfers outside
of the department as soon as they could. It is also important to note the lack of awareness from
an equity perspective between female managers and male managers as none of the male
participants mentioned or seemed to notice the lack of equity between expectations for both
groups of managers. All participants agreed that the elevated expectations that the environment
at Shipping Direct had added to the pressure they felt in their positions. This led to lowered job
satisfaction and caused them to look for positions outside of the organization.
Unclear Communication
Communication was a theme that came up in all the interviews with the participants.
Based on the interview feedback, there was a break in communication among all parts of the
department, which caused a lot of unnecessary pressure and frustration among all interview
participants, which is covered in the next sections. The communication theme was split into two
subthemes: expectations and role clarity.
Expectations
Expectations in this section are defined as those expectations communicated from the
corporate and upper management teams that could have led to broken communication chains. All
the participants reported that the most frustrating break in communication was when there was a
new change occurring in the current processes at the department. Cristina noted that:
46

You would walk in and there it was, there was, like, very minimal communication. There
was, like, very minimal communication towards the later years. Maybe you would get,
like, an advance notice of a few days or a day before, but typically you walk into a new
process or a new HR [human resources] policy or something that you would have to
communicate to your team later on.
Cristina spoke of how a change would be handed down with very minimal information
and an even smaller window for the team to understand it. John noted that, “I’m sure that PM
[program manager] has had a clear idea on exactly what they wanted in the new, new process,
but maybe it didn’t get filtered down and communicated all the way down effectively.” John also
noted this “top-down approach” did not work because no one from the team that was
implementing the changes was around to help and the expectation was that the teams in this
department would execute the change. Clark explained it best:
The communication, it was just kind of, like, thrown at us of, like, this is how it is going
to be, this is, this is it, and you need to adapt, no matter what that was the
communication, and that does not work.
The reported expectations, based on Clark’s experience, to adapt and move forward put a
lot of stress on the managers, hurting the ability of the corporate teams implementing these
changes to get buy-in from the groups. Having no feedback loop and no way to voice concerns is
hurtful when establishing positive work cultures (Kontoghiorghes, 2016). Maria noted the
“tactical perspective, it was such a mess as well.” She perceived these changes as not well
planned. There was also the style of communicating change that seemed rushed, as Daniel noted:
“I don’t necessarily, like, just always, like, the, the quick and dirty meetings of just, like, word
vomiting of big changes in the middle of just like the regular meeting.”
47

Participants also noted that there were always consistently moving targets and goals.
Participants discussed how the metrics that were a priority one month could be different the next
month. John noted that “whenever priorities kind of shifted based on district priorities, our
responsibilities shifted.” He continued that the following month, that goal would change or the
area of focus would change. He also noted:
So, I think it was always kind of a fluid, fluid understanding, right? You always have to
kind of be able to adapt, and so, you know, I think a lot of that stems from just
communication from our, our operations manager kind of setting the expectations, setting
the guidelines.
John’s comments illustrate that the need to adapt and improve was stressful for the
management team. Participants described walking into their shift after being off for three days
and noticing that a whole new process was launched in that brief time with no communication
ahead of time about that change. Cristina experienced something similar:
You would walk in and there was, there was, like, very minimal communication towards
the later years. Maybe you would get, like, an advance notice of a few days or a day
before, but typically you walk into a new process or a new HR policy or something that
you would have to communicate to your team later on.
Maria, Cristina, Luther, and Elliot noted that they did not like taking time off because
they were worried about a substantial change occurring and they would struggle to catch up.
Maria explained how “just like warehouse management stuff, I was, like, I never want, so it was
really like scary about my job, like, literally what I do my day could change overnight.” This
type of break in communication added to the pressures of the job, which gave participants
another reason to look outside the organization for new positions.
48

Role Clarity
To add to the stresses of lack of communication when it came to expectations during the
change process, participants also agreed that expectations of their roles were not communicated
effectively. The roles for managers at Levels 4 to 6 were vague and ambiguous, as described by
all participants. There was a perception that the organization was full of smart people that lacked
the ability to effectively communicate what was needed of managers at Levels 4 to 6. David
noted:
Um, you know, cause OK, so I think. The bigness of, like, not knowing, not knowing
what to do you know, like what responsibilities you had was because, am do so new, um,
but also, I think there is. Definitely, there is a culture of, like, really smart people that
they, they knew what they, they had a vision or an idea inside their head and they were
not able to convey it to the masses. And that that made it difficult, it made it a very like.
You know, there were silos of information. This is why that arch that I had just
mentioned of networking was so important because it started to pull those silos in
together and, like, create that critical mass, I mentioned, because there for, for a bit of
time, you know.
Like David, the remaining seven participants stated that they perceived their role to be
very ambiguous with their expectations continuously changing, which caused a lack of role
clarity. John noted that the responsibilities were depending on the focus of the manager:
“specific direction from our operations manager.” This was partially due to the lack of training
that most new managers received. Cristina noted that most managers only got a week of training
and were expected to run their own shift within the first week of starting their job. Cristina
experienced this and noted that:
49

I was able to learn everything on the job, but training I believe was a weeklong
something, like official training at the building itself was maybe weeklong. And then [I
was] expected to kind of take full ownership of the show.
Maria perceived that the role was purposely left ambiguous to allow the organization more
flexibility when needed. The bare minimum was communicated by management so that the
changes to the responsibilities would be constant. Maria noted that:
Um, I think it was, like, intentionally vague, so it was like, just make sure it gets done,
was kind of like responsibility set, um, so it was like, basically, like, you’re going to
receive however amount of packages, you have no control over, like, what resources
really that you’ll have or, like, how much it will be. But like, regardless of what happens,
you just need to make sure that all those, like, go out on, like, a truck and go to a delivery
driver in some sense.
Although the lack of clarity might have allowed the department to have more flexibility,
participants reported that it was a large source of frustration for the management teams at the
buildings. There was a lack of understanding of what was expected of managers, as noted by
David, and having a fast environment made the process of picking it all up even more difficult.
David noted that:
Um, it was difficult at times, especially when I first entered as a Level 5, and to Shipping
Direct does have this peculiar language that it kind of speaks. You have a lot of,
especially me being so brand new to Shipping Direct, in the first place, like, there’s just a
lot of programs that don’t talk to each other. There are a million different platforms, they
that—the, they’re just very, there’s not a lot of consistency and fluidity with them, and so
that was difficult to understand, on top of Shipping Direct just being like a fast paced.
50

The stresses of learning an often-changing role, with lack of direction and a demanding
environment, was a lot of pressure for the participants. John, David, Daniel, Bruce, Cristina,
Maria, and Elliot all stated the pressure in the early days was a lot to bear. Communicating role
clarity is important to ensure that managers are set up for success at any organization. Mafuba et
al. (2015) noted that a lack of role clarity increases ambiguity, ultimately increasing the stress
and pressure that employees face. This ambiguity added pressure to an already stress-filled
position at Shipping Direct.
Opportunities for Professional Growth
Opportunities for career advancement were important to most people at Shipping Direct,
according to all eight participants. One area of concern was the lack of a standardized process for
promotions in the department, which Maria noted:
Yeah, so I think they, they almost tried to, like, create, like, competition as well and like,
kind of create these, like, promises, like, that are, like, “Most people get promoted in this
amount of time, so like, if you’re really good, this will happen for you.” And, just like, I
am also very much, like, yes, making sure that, like, people are aware of their mistakes,
so how did I navigate that? I guess I just was kind of taking, like, that pressure and, like,
my own, like, will to succeed and like, learning as I went, and I think I, like, wasn’t sure
about, like, normal amount of support that you would get a job, as I hadn’t worked yet, so
I was, like, totally willing to, like you know, just try something and figure it out, without
asking.
Participants shared that promises were made to get them promoted without ever giving
clear communication on what that should look like. Maria and Cristina noted that management
would say that participants needed to complete a certain project to get a promotion but were not
51

clear about that project. This leads both Maria and Cristina to be frustrated with the promotion
process. Cristian stated that “it became clear like you were basically your best advocate” when it
came to seeking promotions.
There was also a lack of support that upper management gave to employees to ensure
they were successful. Elliot noted that “accessibility and availability will be at the top of my this
probably my biggest frustration with support.” Many upper managers would say they owned
their development and expected the participants to put in the arduous work without any support.
Maria noted that:
The pressure, I mean, I think, having any sort of, like, feeling of, like, support, like, in
like, feel I guess, feeling like someone was, like, on your side, because almost, like, the
dynamic between, like, myself and the management and even, like, my own coworkers
was all very, like, like, every man for themselves kind of a thing.
This feeling of every person for themself did not create a cohesive work environment and
caused a lot of unhealthy competition in the team, as Daniel noted: “We have to be better than
them and, and that creates such a toxic environment.” Participants agreed with Elliot’s statement
that it was a “it’s a move up or move out kind of thing.” When participants shared that their
growth was not going to be achieved and showed interest in wanting to go to a different
department, they said it was met with negativity from the upper management team. Daniel
recalled:
Anytime I went about applying for something that was either out of my industry or out of
my niche, if I am applying for something that is out of the warehouse, that would—in
essence, I feel like I am climbing out of this hole. I’m just going to be honest and I’m
going to going to proceed into something new there’s always this one guy keeping me
52

back, what this goes back into: just honest communication of applying to a role outside of
your current standards or it’s not in a direct career path, so if I’m a Level 5 I’m doing
something totally out of the scene. The hierarchy in the lines of communication of, like,
that hiring manager and just a lot of people get flagged and then a lot of questions get
called in of, like, “What are you doing and why?” And they—in a sense, you get
pressured, and you feel guilty, for having an aspiration that is outside of regular
operations.
All participants mentioned wanting to apply for transfers outside of their department but
were afraid of the blowback from making this decision, like Daniel’s feedback. The process as
explained by Daniel was that you had to get your direct manager’s approval to apply for any
jobs, and if you did apply without telling them, “Just a lot of people get flagged” that the person
applied for a role and asking if they approved it. Four of the participants noted that this led them
to look for positions outside of the organization because they did not want their direct managers
to know about them wanting to leave. Bruce, John, Cristina, and Maria shared similar
perceptions that when they communicated a desire to move outside the department, they
perceived that they were blocked and lost their positioning among the ranks of the Level 4 to 6
managers, which affected their yearly reviews. Bruce perceived that, “Once I, like, made it clear
that I was going to go to a program team outside of operations, there was a lot of hard feelings
and drama.” Upper managers did not want to take the time to develop someone that they
perceived would be leaving them soon. As Bruce noted, “upper management supported me
reaching my goals, so far as it was best for [operations].” All participants listed career
development or advancement as a reason for wanting to look outside the organization for other
roles. Whether it was due to the lack of a standard process for promotion or the negative
53

feedback they got from wanting to transfer, it was not the right environment for them, leading to
them looking for roles outside the organization.
Research Question 2: What Suggestions Do Former Managers at Levels 4 to 6 in the Final
Mile Delivery Department Have to Improve the Culture at the Organization?
Climate
The work environment was one of the first themes that participants consistently brought
up during the interview process to improve the organizational culture. There seemed to be a
misalignment between the expectations of managers and senior managers. Specifically, they
referenced the expectations placed on current managers between Levels 4 and 6. Clark suggested
that:
My senior [operations] manager at the time was a lovely guy. But he focused a little bit
too much on specific metrics rather than the people. They should take into consideration
the success of the building that you are at or, you know, the facility that you are at.
Another third of that success should be, like, depending on your direct manager and
another third of that of that measurement should be metrics specific to you.
He suggested that the expectations to consistently perform should be reduced by allowing
a focus on more intangible characteristics such as manager feedback. David suggested something
similar in nature:
A mix between, like, tangible measures that you have influenced directly, as well as your
peer, like, a little bit of, like, your peers’ judgment of you as a leader or, as well as, like,
employee judgment of you as leader. And kind of, like, creating a really dynamic
contextual mix of things that tells a story and, like you know, you got to codify that the
54

right way, but, like, tells a more complete holistic story of what that leader is rather than
just doing.
Another area mentioned by Daniel was removing the perception that managers are
expected to work long hours by setting the right example. Bruce, as illustrated in Research
Question 1, noted how one of his managers was rated low because of this and it affected how
they were perceived by upper management:
A couple people on my team who, you know, work–life [balance] is very important to
them, they want to work 40 hours and that’s it, but they’re very good at what they did,
and I found myself defending them in or and reviews, because the perception was that
they were not, you know, top-tier whatever, but it’s not because they weren’t hitting
metrics but because, you know, they work 40 hours.
Bruce shared that managers should set the tone for having work–life balance, “Probably
if there was a stronger culture around, like, like, work–life harmony, work–life balance. And
there was, like, a—there was efforts from, like, leadership to push you to, to take time off and
balance your time.” There was also the perception that the numbers matter more than the people
in the organization’s culture, as discussed in the performance section of Research Question 1.
Bruce noted a solution: “I think overall, like, if the support was right sized to, like, support the
human versus just the job, and it would create like more longevity within, like, obstacles.” The
“right sizing” that Bruce mentioned would mean adding a headcount to the buildings to help
remove the perception that taking time off was frowned upon and difficult. Daniel suggested that
this would help improve employee morale:
Things are just getting lost, and I think if you kind of dial it back, like, was really OK,
like, do we did really need $60 billion this year? We cannot do like $50 billion, but we
55

have all our workers a little bit happier, they get a little bit more time off, we actually
show a little bit more appreciation.
Showing appreciation to the workforce by allowing them to take the time off they need
and making sure that they balance their lives is what Daniel was noting with reducing profits in
favor of helping the workforce. All eight participants suggested that removing a focus purely on
performance metrics and allowing employees to take time off would help improve morale overall
and ensure that employees have some form of work–life balance. Maria noted that “a
comfortable work environment and want to work somewhere they seem, like, they, like, invest in
people and, like, our understanding of, like, you might have to go the doctor sometimes are, like,
everyone needs to take a vacation.” Clark also noted that if this improved, he would think about
returning to the organization: “making sure that the work–life balance was good.” The remaining
participants shared similar feedback when it came to improving the climate at the organization.
Communication
The second theme uncovered during the analysis was communication and how it could be
improved. The specific part of communication that caused frustration for the participants was the
process of communicating change, which was also referenced during the findings of Research
Question 1. The focus was on suggestions that the participants provided to improve the overall
communication of change. The first suggestion came from Daniel, who suggested not rushing the
process and creating a document to share:
The change, especially if it is building, it is, it is going to take the building of, like, “OK,
let’s all actually go out to where that thing is, that look at it, feel it, to talk about it, even
if it’s 5 minutes.” I think that goes longer than just talking about, like, just a quick blurb
in a, know, in your morning meetings and how everybody written down. And I guess the
56

last thing is I am actually, like, look, I am a big visual—I like when there is actually like,
a like, a document or a PDF of, like, what was the current state and then this is the
change. I think actually being able to see or even visualize, like, what we are actually
fixing, like, “Dude, like, this is what it was and this is what we’re bringing.”
Daniel also went on to say that a lot of people are visual learners, so having a document
would be valuable to ensure everyone understood the process. Clark also echoed that suggestion
by stating the need to have “basically a playbook of things that are supposed to happen” to
ensure that everyone understands the process completely. It is important to ensure that
employees understand the change, because a lack of understanding can lead to increased
frustration and retention issues. De Leon (2020) found that the more management explained a
process that was changing and steps that might need to be taken, the more employees were likely
to stay at the organization because they understood the process and were not frustrated. Cristina
confirmed that by stating, “just more communication to give more of a background would have
definitely taken away frustration.”
Elliot also suggested that creating a standard process for communicating all changes, no
matter the scope, would be beneficial to reducing this frustration. He stated:
Standardizing change or standardizing the change process. Where, you know, if you get
something that came down from, you know, corporate and where it was something that
was going to be implemented, you know, network wide. You know, there is, I would
imagine, a very standard process for that, and that is when you get the training materials
and, you know, the email, and all that kind of stuff that tell me how it was and all that
sort of.
57

Creating a standardized process for communicating the change could clear up confusion
about the change and its purpose. Bruce also added that apart from standardizing the process, it
should also be communicated earlier to allow for proper training time. He stated:
If we would have gotten, like, the change invitation of what the current process was what
specifically was changing and how it would affect the tech of the processes, maybe three
weeks in advance, so it would allow time to facilitate training of the teams or
stakeholders.
Bruce suggested that ensuring that managers had this time to train their team would
ensure that the process will be smoother and lead to less frustration and job-related stress. De
Leon (2020) found that poor top-down communication leaves employees feeling negative
emotions and dissatisfaction with their role due to uncertainty. It was not only process-related
changes that were communicated poorly but also personnel-related change, as noted by John
about when a decision was made to move all Level 5 managers to night shift:
You know, when they told us that the L5 area managers had to switch from the daytime
shift to the nighttime shift, I think what would have helped was providing a little bit more
context than just because that is the biggest shift and that is what corporate wants to me. I
think that situation could have been handled a lot better to me the communication there
was completely lacking. It was just, you know, a couple of sentences here and there and
then, you know, affects somebody’s life for the rest, you know, for their career, right?
This change that John mentioned affected his personal life, and he did not get a say or
time to adjust. He mentioned how upper management did not help the managers through this
change: “They didn’t really work with the Level 5 area managers to help them transition through
that time.” John also noted that exceptions should have been allowed for employees who could
58

not transition right away and stated that they could have explained the lateral transfer process for
managers who wanted more options. Supervisor communication is critical to the success of
employees. Tymon et al. (2011) found that managerial support had a significant direct impact on
retention of employees 1 year after they started a position. Researchers have found that
supervisor communication served a critical role in reducing job-related stress for employees
(Kim & Lee, 2009).
Opportunities for Professional Growth
The third theme identified for Research Question 2 was the creation of opportunities for
professional growth in the organization. One area of frustration for participants was that there
was no focus on personal development in the department. Bruce noted this:
Focus on my personal development. If executioners are meant to execute, management is
meant to develop and help those executioners’ progress and meet their personal and
professional goals. So, like, standardized development syncs and focus, like, just honest
feedback on how humans are doing and what they can do better, and what they need to do
to develop what they developed a, like you know, meet their goals.
Bruce also noted that in development conversations, the focus was on the metric numbers
and not the personal development of the managers. David also noted the same issue with
development focus and suggested a solution of “a mix between, like, tangible measures that you
have influenced directly” and not only performance metrics. He went on to suggest splitting the
focus of development into thirds—building success, direct manager feedback, and tangible
performance metrics—as noted previously in the climate theme. All participants agreed that the
focus on performance metrics only as a measure of success was determinantal to their
development, as discussed in Research Question 1.
59

Management was also perceived to have their favorites who got most of the support at the
site for their development, which was not fair to the operation. Cristina noted that:
At times, it was like somebody was being groomed for the next position, so any and all
opportunities were just given to that person. So I would say, you know, to make it more
of a fair process, other employees should be able to get an opportunity to not even
participate in the same, in the same thing, but you know, have an equal shot at some sort
of project or something that can get them a little bit more of a broad experience or even
providing some training additional trainings, like, offering them, because a lot of these
trainings people didn’t really know existed. You kind of have to search for them and ask
around for it, so it was kind of, like, you were very much in charge of your own
advancement, that you have to fight for it a little bit.
Cristina noted that providing this fair opportunity to all managers would also remove the
perception that there were favorites. All participants also perceived that the process was not clear
for either promotions or lateral transfers. When Clark was asked if this process was explained
clearly, his response was “not at all,” as it was for all the participants. John noted that human
resources should have a role in helping clarify this process:
Making sure that HR sits down with everybody. And you know, opens up that line of
communication, because you know, I think a lot of people, maybe one meeting a month,
they might, you know, they might not be able to get through those barriers that they
might be having.
This is important because employees need to have a clear path for career development to
maintain higher levels of job satisfaction (Kunte et al., 2017).
60

The last area of professional development that participants suggested for good
professional development was mentorship. Clark noted that his relationship with his direct
manager was critical to his development:
This is somebody that I referred to earlier as somebody that I would talk to and, you
know, ask questions, and he was more so a mentor to me, as you know, than a direct
manager and kind of asked me what I thought, rather than tell me what I needed to do.
Which is, you know, he is still telling me what I need to do, but asking me how to get
there, which is, in my opinion, was very, very smart and he was able to utilize that.
Mentorship was critical to Clark’s development, but he noted that he only received that
type of relationship from one of the three managers he had while working at Shipping Direct.
Daniel also stated that his success at the organization was due to managers who mentored him.
“They helped me really acquire the knowledge of how to actually perform my duties, was saying
a successful manager performance, so being mentored.” Likewise, David shared a similar
relationship with his direct manager that helped his development because she was a clear and
precise communicator: “She was a great curator, she, she could just deliver a message very clean
and concisely, to give direct purpose direction and motivation to a team.” David also noted: “So,
it’s very difficult at times, and I leaned on mentorship” as a tool to help him get through
challenging times. All participants noted times when they had great mentors during their time in
the Final Mile Delivery Department that helped their development and times when they did not
have that relationship and how it negatively affected their relationship.
Role Clarity
The last theme uncovered during the interviews on how to better improve the culture at
Shipping Direct’s Final Mile Delivery Department was improving role clarity. One area
61

mentioned by participants to improve role clarity was improving the training program, especially
for new managers. Cristina addressed this issue:
Definitely for someone in my situation, I was a college hire, maybe some, maybe even
just some courses on, like, a training on how to communicate with a team, or how to lead
a team, or some sort of training that could kind of assist in doing that, especially for
somebody who’s totally new to it—that would have been a nice addition.
Because Cristina was a new hire from college, as were many of the Level 4 managers,
training could help clear up this ambiguity of the role. Daniel also noted that when it came to
being a brand-new manager, “workshops should have been like that should be a requirement” to
help improve his skills at the start of his role. John mentioned that at the start of his career,
“honestly, it was a lot of trial and error” when it came to his understanding of the role, and he
wished that there had been a better training program at the start to remove ambiguity. Role
ambiguity can cause role conflict, role stress, and role overload, which can increase the
likelihood of an employee looking for new roles (Mafuba et al., 2015). All eight participants
suggested that training at that start of their career at Shipping Direct in the Final Mile Delivery
Department was lacking and needed improvement.
One area that participants felt helped them improve that ambiguity and make the lack of
training better was the peer support they received. Clark summed it up best by noting:
Ways that I was able to deal with specific pressures were again, talking to people and
talking to other station managers to ask them, “Hey, how would you do this?” or “Hey,
have you experienced this in the past?” or “Hey, what can I do to make this better?” And
always knowing that I had a support system with the other station managers was always
something that was great.
62

This was especially important to the early success of all the participants, and they noted
that these types of relationships helped improve the overall stress of the position. Bruce noted
how this relationship helped mitigate everyone’s performance because they were helping each
other: “I think pressure release was, like, the camaraderie amongst our crew and, like, I knew
that if I did well and set up the shift and they would have a better day and so on.” David noted
how:
Whether it was in inside of shipping direct or outside of it, but like, having that
connection, where you have somebody you trust that you can be, like, “Hey, like, I’m last
right now, like help me out,” or “Hey, like, have you experienced this set of problems
before?” or like, “What, what are your best practices?” And that that was really critical—
like, it was really key, I would say, like, arc that took place and as well as it started to
really scale where a lot of this, like, networking started to take place where there is
trusted minds that were working in, in kind of harmony, for the first time created, like,
this critical mass where you had folks with similar mindsets reaching out to each other
and saying, “Hey, what’s your best practice? What is your best practice? What is your
best practice?” And it is, like, the more iteration that happened, the closer we got to, like,
best practices and benchmarking.
David went on to say how this type of networking and benchmarking among their peers
helped establish a lot of standard work for the department even though it was not required. David
also mentioned how this type of effort should become the norm to help remove role ambiguity by
“building those bonds and friendships and figuring it out.” All eight participants listed how peer-
to-peer relationships were a key to their success and helped them overcome all obstacles they
encountered at Shipping Direct. This was overwhelmingly clear, because when asked the last
63

question in the interview about the most enjoyable part of working at the organization, all of
them had the same answer. John said, “The people, the people are the best part.” Maria stated, “I
think, like, the camaraderie that comes from going through like a really tough time with
someone.” Daniel said that his journey at Shipping Direct and the struggles he went through with
his coworkers helped him “make lifelong friends. I made wonderful connections.” Cristina
summed it up:
I really enjoy a lot of my coworkers. Everybody, you know, we’re all in the same, same
place doing the same thing, so you know, we’re just kind of able to work hard together
but also laugh, as sad as it sounds, you know, laughs with misery, like, whoa, like, we
were able to kind of move through it together and, like, make the company, because
sometimes the shift will get pretty long and if I didn’t have good coworkers, and it would
be extra-long.
All the participants agreed that this peer relationship is what got them through all the challenging
times.
Summary
The themes uncovered during the analysis of the interviews completed with these
participants were consistent in their comments and with the literature. The participants all agreed
that the negative organizational culture at Shipping Direct was an area of concern,
communication issues lead to a lot of frustration and stress, and opportunities for professional
growth were not communicated well and lacking. All these areas caused them to look for other
positions outside of the organization. But they also provided ways of improving this by clearing
up expectations due to misalignment with senior managers, improving communication,
strengthening opportunities for professional growth, and ensuring role clarity. Overall, the
64

participants were united in their perception of the concerns at Shipping Direct’s Final Mile
Delivery Department and how they could be improved.

65

Chapter Five: Recommendations
The purpose of this chapter is to identify which factors within Shipping Direct’s
organizational culture might influence the organization’s ability to retain its managers and
provide recommendations for addressing it. This chapter will help explain how social cognitive
Theory helped understand the findings.
Discussion of Findings
In Chapter 2, the conceptual framework of social cognitive theory was discussed.
Social cognitive theory focuses on the three interrelated factors that influence the social
ecosystem: personal, behavioral, and environmental (Bandura, 2012). The theory is focused on
the idea that these three determinants influence the actions that any given person will take
(Bandura, 2012). The interplay of these three determinants can also have an impact on the self-
efficacy of managers. Self-efficacy is defined as the personal judgements of one’s own
capabilities on whether they will be successful in any given situation or not (Bandura, 1997).
The themes uncovered in the findings of this research are connected to the conceptual
framework. The managers at Shipping Direct perceived that there were environmental pressures
based on the organization’s culture and the climate of the work environment that ultimately
ended in them wanting to leave the organization. The participants experienced pressure to
perform and to continuously improve their performance while working in the Final Mile
Delivery department. The expectations that the participants perceived were put on them impacted
their behaviors and actions while working there, which negatively impacted their self-efficacy of
how successful they felt working within the organization. This was evident in Elliot’s frustration
in constantly feeling like he needed to be promoted or leave his current position due to
continuous need for growth. The lack of work life balance, broken communication, and
66

ambiguous role clarity that they experienced created what they perceived as a broken
organizational culture. The perceived pressures that the participants experienced impacted the
personal, behavioral, and environmental determinants within the organization’s ecosystem,
which created an environment that they could not continue to work in. The environment
impacted their self-efficacy, as they perceived it created an environment of uncertainty for job
security, constant upheaval with poorly communicated expected changes and job performance
evaluations that was dehumanizing since they were based questionable metrics, leading them to
look for positions outside the organization.
These themes that were in the findings connect to the literature that was reviewed in
Chapter 2 of this dissertation. Organizational culture was the largest cause of departure for the
participants. Leisanyane and Khaola (2013) found that an organization’s culture that is impacted
by negative working conditions influences an employee’s desire to stay at the organization. The
continuous pressure that participants recalled from a performance metric goal perspective,
elevated expectations of advancement and work life balance perspective impacted their personal
lives, which caused them to seek other positions. Sok, et al. (2014) found that supportive and
innovative cultures had a strong positive correlation with a positive work-home balance and
overall increased retention rates which inversely connects to the findings since the participant did
not experience this support. The literature also illustrated that communication was important to
reducing stress on the employees (Kim & Lee, 2009). Participants noted how broken
communication added stress to their daily workload. Opportunities for professional growth were
also a theme in the findings and in the literature review. Verbruggen and van Emmerik (2020)
found a positive correlation between employees that had opportunities to promote or transfer
internally and positive job satisfaction. The participants noted unclear paths to promotion and
67

perceived negative outcomes when asking to transfer internally as well. This was noted as
causing the participants negative job satisfaction as well and a feeling of being stuck. Role
ambiguity was also a theme in both the literature and the findings. Mafuba, et al. (2015) found
that a lack of role clarity leads to ambiguity, which decreased job satisfaction and increases role
stress and conflict. The role clarity ambiguity that the participants experienced also lead to work
stress and confusion within the organization. The participants perceived that their expectations
were not consistent, and communication caused ambiguity that could have been easily resolved
and improved overall job satisfaction. Overall, the findings and the literature were consistent,
supporting that these themes reduce retention rates at organizations.
Recommendations for Practice
The purpose of this study was to identify which factors within Shipping Direct’s
organizational culture might influence the organization’s ability to retain its managers. The
findings from the research completed identified those factors that did impact the organization’s
culture at Shipping Direct’s Final Mile Delivery department. Communication, role clarity,
expectations, pressure to perform, opportunities for professional growth, and work life balance
all impacted the organization’s culture overall according to the participants experiences. These
factors all created a climate that the participants did not want to work in and led to them seeking
employment in another organization. During my data gathering and analysis, I was surprised that
there was not a negative experience with human resources as I expected from my own personal
experience. Only two participants listed human resources as a blocker to their success. The rest
of the data was not surprising based on my experience at the time of employment in the Final
Mile Delivery Department. With the findings uncovered and the suggestions provided by the
participants, recommendations can be made to help improve these factors in the future for the
68

organization and help improve retention rates for current and future managers of the
organization.
In this section, based on the findings of the research that was completed, three
recommendations will be given to help address the problem of practice. The three
recommendations will be improving role clarity and communication, clarifying the promotion
and transfer process, and focusing on the work life balance of managers.
Recommendation 1: Improving Role Clarity and Communication
For the first recommendation, Shipping Direct’s Final Mile Delivery Department should
focus on improving role clarity for the Level 4 to 6 managers. Shipping Direct should create a
peer team of same level managers, human resources partners and regional managers to help
clearly identify the tasks and responsibilities for every manager role. Within this process, there
should also be a section added on the metric to ensure that all employees understand the why
behind each metric and how it is important. Even a process for improvements to metrics using
the internal white paper process to ensure there is a continuous feedback loop if metrics become
outdated. Once the responsibilities and tasks are finalized, a new training program based on these
tasks should be created with the expectation of all new managers going through that training
program first before being able to run any shifts as lead managers. All eight participants
suggested that a more robust and complete training program would have removed ambiguity
within the role and helped reduced stress when starting in the new position. Role ambiguity
causes increased stress, work overload and conflict between managers which is why this is
important to address first (Mafuba, et al., 2015).
Peers also played a crucial role in helping the participants understand their current roles,
Shipping Direct should create trainer positions given to their high performing managers to be
69

mentors to new managers. This would be beneficial to both the new managers by giving them
someone to lean on for support as well as being a good opportunity to mentor and develop others
to help create more well-rounded managers for the current high performing managers. This
support system and improved training program will help reduce stress and ambiguity within the
role, which will increase job satisfaction since poorly designed managerial roles lead to increased
stress and lower job satisfaction (Monsen & Wayne Boss, 2009).
Another area that caused ambiguity within the participants’ experience was
communication, whether it was for changes or for expectations. When the role is established by
the committee, any change in expectation should require approval of both regional and human
resources management to ensure consistency from building to building. Since supervisor
communication is critical to reducing job related stress, this recommendation would help limit
ambiguity from building to building within the department and ensure consistency of the
expectations that managers have on them (Kim & Lee, 2009). From a communicating change
perspective, any changes should have a standard communication process established that needs
to be followed before launch. Support teams with Regional Managers should establish a launch
timeline for all changes that cannot be changed without Director Approval to ensure consistency
of time to prep for new changes from building to building. This will help improve job
satisfaction and reduce uncertainty since poor communication leaves can cause this and cause
employees to look for employment elsewhere (de Leon, 2020). From a social cognitive theory
perspective, this will help improve the behavioral and environmental determinants within the
organization, leading to increased job satisfaction which should in turn improve the personal
determinant and self-efficacy.
70

Recommendation 2: Clarifying the Promotion and Transfer Process
The second recommendation that impacted on the participants’ job satisfaction overall
was the promotion and internal transfer process. Most participants perceived continuously
changing expectations for promotions, and most were afraid of the internal transfer process since
they perceived it would be met with negative feelings from management if at all brought up. To
help remedy this, regional management and human resources need to put together an established
milestones and timeline of promotion that is available for Level 4 to 6 managers. This needs to
be detailed and available to all employees to reference. When managers have one-on-one
meetings, this guide should be referenced when creating road maps to help employees that want
to be promoted know where they stand and so that if there is change in management, there is no
impact to the road map of the employee. With this promotion guide, there should also be an
internal transfer guide created as well to be included in case employees would like to switch
roles. Once these two have been created, training should be provided to all employees to make
sure they understand the process. An area of focus for this training should be sensitivity training
and ensuring managers know there is a zero-tolerance policy for retaliation if employees want to
transfer to another role. Employees that do not have clear paths to promotion and are not allowed
to transfer internally suffer with reduced job satisfaction and increased desire to leave the
organization (Verbruggen & van Emmerik, 2020). Employees without a clear path to promotion
or opportunity for development is listed as a top reason that employees leave their organization
(Longenecker & Fink, 2014). This will have an impact on all three determinants of the
department’s ecosystem. Promotions and opportunities for development have an impact on
employees’ personal and behavioral perspectives. Having position outcomes in both those areas
will help improve the overall environment at the organization. This will also improve employee
71

self-efficacy and ensure that employees have improved job satisfaction. This will lead to
improved retention of employees in the department and the organization.
Recommendation 3: Improving Work Life Balance
The last recommendation is to help improve the work-life balance of the managers in the
Final Mile Department. One area where all the participant’s voiced frustration was the lack of
ability to take time off when they wanted to. While increasing headcount at every building might
not be realistic, hiring a floating coverage manager would go a long way to ensure that
employees are able to take the time off that they have earned. Each region would have at least
one floating coverage manager depending on the size of the region who can go to any station in
that region and help cover vacations or even sick time if necessary. This will ensure that
employees feel that the organization is committed to them having a work life balance and reduce
burnout among the employees. Organizations that show a personal interest and commitment to
their employees have a higher chance of retaining their employees (Thompson & Gregory 2012;
Tymon, et al., 2011). Showing a commitment to employees will in turn also increase job
satisfaction which will improve organizational culture (Thompson & Gregory, 2012). This will
have a direct impact on the environment of the organization from a social cognitive theory
perspective, which will also improve the behavioral and personal determinants.
Limitations and Delimitations
A limitation that this study had was my limited time completing the study as a doctoral
student. I had to complete the study within a short window and was not able to extend the
research further than that time frame which limited my ability to find participants. Another
limitation for this study was that I was only able to interview previous Shipping Direct
employees as I did not receive approval to conduct research in the company with current
72

employees. This limited the scope and might have created more bias since these employees left
the organization for an underlying reason. Another limitation of this study was the fact that all
participants left the organization, so their experience and perspective could be more negative
than current employees at the organization. Some Delimitations for this study was that I did this
study only on the specific department of Final Mile Delivery and not others. Within the
department, I was only focused on Level’s four to six of management. These Delimitations
restricted the availability of participants and experiences which only allowed me to get eight
usable interviews, but also allowed me to create more focused recommendations for
improvement.
Recommendations for Future Research
To help expand on this research, in the future it would be more inclusive if it could be
done on current employees as it would allow for a more in-depth look at what keeps the current
employees at the organization. It will allow for a large-scale study and provide more in-depth
analysis into what the current workforce is looking for. If this type of in-depth research were
completed by the human resources department as well, they would have more time to gather the
data and be able to reference results from current surveys to have more informed research
questions based on current trends. This would also allow the organization to expand the research
if necessary to various levels of employees and gain a greater understanding of the current
workforce.
Conclusion
Organizational culture was the top reason that all participants listed as a cause for
wanting to seek employment outside the organization. Through the literature review and
interviews completed with the participants, the themes were consistent on what could be done to
73

help improve the overall culture at the organization. The new generation of employees is
growing increasingly not afraid to switch positions if they felt that the culture at the organization
was broken (Saeed et al., 2018). As companies grow and expand, organizational culture should
be the focus to ensure that with growth, the culture does not become broken, and the employee’s
wellbeing continues to be a core focus within the workforce. Support-oriented cultures within
organizations have been shown to lead to higher job satisfaction among employees and create an
environment that benefits both the employee and company alike (Lopez-Martin & Topa, 2019).
Going through this process and reliving the experience that the participants shared reminded me
of what I need to avoid in building a strong and cohesive team currently. The different
experiences that each participant shared is a sign that consistency and equity among all
employees is key in ensuring job satisfaction remains high within organizations. Focusing on the
employee and removing the pressures that are within the company’s control will allow
companies to continue their projected growth, without having to stall due to them being unable to
retain their employees.
74

References
Bandura A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt (Eds.)
Great Minds in Management. (pp. 9–35) Oxford University Press.
Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of
Management, 38(1), 9–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410606
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman and Company.
Cook, I. (2021). Who is driving the great resignation? Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2021/09/who-is-driving-the-great-resignation
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage.
de Leon, M. V. (2020). Impact of managerial communication, managerial support, and
organizational culture difference on turnover intention: A tale of two merged banks.
Problems and Perspectives in Management, 18(4), 376–387.
https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(4).2020.30
de Valk, P. (2015). How businesses can deal with a bad manager. Strategic HR Review, 14(3),
74–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-04-2015-0029
Gibbs, G. (2018). Analyzing qualitative data (Vol. 6). Sage.
Johnson, B. R., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Methods of data collection. In Educational
research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
Kim, H., & Lee, S. (2009). Supervisory communication, burnout, and turnover intention among
social workers in health care settings. Social Work in Health Care, 48(4), 364–385.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00981380802598499
75

Kontoghiorghes, C. (2016). Linking high performance organizational culture and talent
management: Satisfaction/motivation and organizational commitment as mediators.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(16), 1833–1853.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1075572
Kunte, M., Gupta, P., Bhattacharya, S., & Neelam, N. (2017). Role overload, role self distance,
role stagnation as determinants of job satisfaction and turnover intention in banking
sector. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 39(5), 590–599.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7176.217022
Leisanyane, K., & Khaola, P. (2013). The influence of organisational culture and job satisfaction
on intentions to leave: The case of Clay Brick Manufacturing Company in Lesotho.
Eastern Africa Social Science Research Review, 29(1), 59–75.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/496275
Locke, L. F., Silverman, S. J., & Spirduso, W. W. (2010). Reading and understanding research
(3rd ed.). Sage.
Longenecker, C., & S. Fink, L. (2014). The top ten reasons that key managers leave. Human
Resource Management International Digest, 22(2), 36–38.
https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID-03-2014-0030
Lopez-Martin, E., & Topa, G. (2019). Organizational culture and job demands and resources:
Their impact on employees’ wellbeing in a multivariate multilevel model. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(17), 3006.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16173006
76

Mafuba, K., Kupara, D., Cozens, M., & Kudita, C. (2015). Importance of role clarity: A critique
of the literature. Learning Disability Practice, 18(8), 28–31.
https://doi.org/10.7748/ldp.18.8.28.e1664
Men, L. R., & Robinson, K. L. (2018). It’s about how employees feel! Examining the impact of
emotional culture on employee–organization relationships. Corporate Communications,
23(4), 470–491. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-05-2018-0065
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Merriam-Webster. (2023a). Expectation. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved January
2, 2023, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/expectations
Merriam-Webster. (2023b). Hourly. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved January 2,
2023, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hourly
Merriam-Webster. (2023c). Retention. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved January 2,
2023, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/retention
Merriam-Webster. (2023d). Salaried. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved January 2,
2023, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/salaried
Merriam-Webster. (2023e). Turnover. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved January 2,
2023, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/turnover
Mitrovska, S., & Eftimov, L. (2016). Calculating the cost for employee turnover in the IT
industry in Macedonia by using a web calculator. Journal of Human Resource
Management, XIX(1), 24–33.
77

Monsen, E., & Wayne Boss, R. (2009). The impact of strategic entrepreneurship inside the
organization: Examining job stress and employee retention. Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, 33(1), 71–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00281.x
Morgan, D. L. (2014). Research design and research methods. In Integrating qualitative and
quantitative methods: A pragmatic approach (pp. 45–62). Sage.
Parent, J., & Lovelace, K. J. (2018). Employee engagement, positive organizational culture and
individual adaptability. On the Horizon, 26(3), 206–214. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-01-
2018-0003
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative interviewing. In Qualitative research and evaluation methods
(3rd ed., pp. 339–428). Sage.
Raftery, C. (2016). The importance of role clarity. Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 12(6), 418–
418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2016.04.016
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2012). Essentials of organizational behavior (11th ed.). Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Saeed, M., Muslim, N., Rahim, A., Rasli, M., Ghani, F., & Redzuan, N. (2018). Millennials
motivation factors and job retention: An evidence from oil and gas company in Malaysia.
Global Business and Management Research, 10(3), 761.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/2159612204/
Sheather, J., & Slattery, D. (2021). The great resignation-how do we support and retain staff
already stretched to their limit? BMJ, 375, n2533. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2533
Sok, J., Blomme, R., & Tromp, D. (2014). Positive and negative spillover from work to home:
The role of organizational culture and supportive arrangements. British Journal of
Management, 25(3), 456–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12058
78

Stone, R. J. (2014). Human resource management. Wiley.
Thompson, C., & Gregory, J. B. (2012). Managing millennials: A framework for improving
attraction, motivation, and retention. The Psychologist Manager Journal, 15(4), 237–246.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10887156.2012.730444
Tracey, J., & Hinkin, T. (2008). Contextual factors and cost profiles associated with employee
turnover. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 49(1), 12–27.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0010880407310191
Tymon, W., Stumpf, S. A., & Smith, R. R. (2011). Manager support predicts turnover of
professionals in India. Career Development International, 16(3), 293–312.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431111140174
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2022a). Table 4. Quits levels and rates by industry and region,
seasonally adjusted - 2021 M11 results. Retrieved January 16, 2022, from
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.t04.htm
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2022b). Job openings and labor turnover survey. Retrieved
January 16, 2022, from https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/JTS000000000000000QUR
Verbruggen, M., & van Emmerik, H. (2020). When staying is dissatisfying: Examining when
and why turnover cognitions affect stayers’ career satisfaction. Journal of Management,
46(4), 530–559. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318801998

79

Appendix A: Interview Protocol Template
Thank you very much for taking the time to talk to me today! I know you are busy and
have a lot on your plate, so I appreciate you taking the time to do this! This should take no longer
than 1 hour and hopefully we can get you back to your day! I’m going to ask you just some
simple questions about your time employed at Shipping Direct in the Final Mile Delivery
Department (Use real name of organization) and what some of your experiences are. If it is ok
with you, I would like to record this meeting only for me to be able to listen to it again to make
sure I do not miss anything in my notes. This recording will strictly be used for that and once I
have completed that portion, I will be deleting the recording. Ok, I am about to start recording,
thank you for allowing me to do this! Do you have any questions before we start?
1. Informational questions:
a. How long did you work at Shipping Direct for?
b. What was your first role when you first started?
c. What was your job level when you left?
2. I am going to start with questions about your work in the Final Mile Delivery
Department and your decision to leave. (RQ1)
a. Tell me about the responsibilities you had (Real organization name)?
b. How were you able to understand your role and responsibilities over your time
at the organization?
i. Probe: What was done correctly in making your responsibilities clear?
ii. Probe: Why was your understanding vague?
80

c. If understood responsibilities skip: How did you manage the challenge of not
understanding your responsibilities? Probe: Can you give me an example of
that?
d. All managerial jobs have some type of pressure, what, if any, did you
experience in your role?
i. Probe: Was there anything specific that made them better?
ii. Probe: How about worse?
iii. Probe: What could have been done to improve it?
iv. Probe: Was there any support to help manage that pressure?
e. Can you describe what success looked like in your role?
f. What type of relationship did you have with your direct manager? Probe: Can
you describe how that relationship came about?
g. Working with supporting teams is important to the overall success of your
team, can you explain the relationship dynamic with your human resources
partner? Probe: What did you do to establish that relationship?
h. Clear communication is important for the overall success of any team, what
role did communication play in your overall success in your role?
i. Probe: In your experience, was communication clear?
ii. Probe: Can you explain that?
i. Were you interested in advancing or changing roles during your time?
i. Probe: How would you describe that process?
ii. Probe: Was the process easy to understand?
iii. Probe: Do you think that the process was communicated clearly?
81

iv. Probe: Would there be anything you would do different for this
process?
3. I’m going to shift focus on areas that would have made things more manageable.
(RQ2)
a. I know that change was constant in that department, can you describe the
process of communicating change? Probe: What would have made
communication clearer?
b. How would you define what a good support system from upper management
and HR looks like?
i. Probe: Did you receive that level of support from them?
ii. Probe: What did that look like?
iii. Probe: In meetings with HR and/or Regional Managers, did you feel
like expectations were set clearly?
c. Did you have any 1:1 meeting with them? Probe: Can you describe in what
ways those meetings were/were not effective?
d. Did you ever need to reach out to HR for support?
i. Probe: If yes: What did that interaction look like?
ii. Probe: Were you satisfied with the interaction?
iii. Probe: If no: Why did you not reach out to them?
e. Can you describe how upper management supported you in reaching your
goals?
i. Probe: Did you communicate your goals to them?
ii. Probe: Would there be anything you would want to change about it?
82

f. Can you describe engagement between teams?
g. Was risk taking supported on your team? Probe: Can you explain that?
h. Was innovation allowed? Probe: Can you explain that?
i. What finally prompted you to leave? Probe: What could have been done to
keep you?
j. When looking for a new position, what factors are you looking for? Probe:
Was the work environment an important factor?
k. How do you describe the work culture at Shipping Direct?
i. Probe: What changes could have been done to make things run more
smoothly? Can you explain?
ii. Probe: What would you recommend stay the same?
l. What would make you want to go back to working at Shipping Direct? Probe:
What do you remember as being enjoyable at your job?
Those were all the questions I had; do you have any questions for me? I really want to
thank you again for taking the time to talk to me today! Would it be ok if I reached out to you
again if I needed some clarification on any of the responses? Hope you have a wonderful day,
talk to you later!

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An analysis of influences to faculty retention at a Philippine college

PDF

Employee retention and the success of a for-profit cosmetics company: a gap analysis

PDF

Employee churn in afterschool care: an evaluation study of manager influences on employee retention and turnover

PDF

Why are they still here: a look at employee retention amidst the COVID-19 pandemic

PDF

Factors that facilitate or hinder staff performance during management turnover

PDF

Improving first-generation students' sense of belonging at university

PDF

Faculty’s influence on underrepresented minority (URM) undergraduate retention

PDF

Organizational model of individuation and employee retention

PDF

Investigating the personal and organizational factors influencing the departure of female physicians from healthcare leadership roles

PDF

The lack of National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) hiring of male and female BIPOC athletics coaches

PDF

A thriving culture of belonging: organizational cultural intelligence and racial minority retention

PDF

COVID-19's impact on Christian cross-cultural workers

PDF

Increasing representation of women in executive technology leadership roles

PDF

The effects of organizational culture on millennial engagement and turnover in start-ups: an innovation study

PDF

Online graduate program retention: exploring the impact of community on student retention rates from the perspectives of faculty and alumni

PDF

An evaluation of teacher retention in K-12 public schools

PDF

The influence of technology support on student retention

PDF

The underrepresentation of Black, indigenous, and people of color in executive-level information technology positions

PDF

Leadership and patient safety culture

PDF

Development of employee well-being initiatives to improve engagement and performance: an innovative study

Asset Metadata

Creator Murtada, Ahmad M Hashim (author)

Core Title Understanding how organizational culture and expectations influence retention of managers

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 04/14/2023

Defense Date 03/29/2023

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag managers,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational culture,retention,turnover

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Carbone, Paula M. (committee chair), Crawford, Jenifer Anne (committee member), Krop, Cathy (committee member)

Creator Email murtada@usc.edu,murtada87@msn.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113015580

Unique identifier UC113015580

Identifier etd-MurtadaAhm-11633.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MurtadaAhm-11633

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Murtada, Ahmad M Hashim

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230417-usctheses-batch-1023 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu