黎巴嫩银行职员工作满意度和员工的绩效【外文翻译】
员工对绩效考核系统的感知外文文献翻译最新译文
文献出处：Boachie-Mensah F, Seidu P A. Employees’ perception of performance appraisal system: A case study[J]. International Journal of Business and Management, 2012, 7(2): p73. 原文Employees' Perception of Performance Appraisal System: A Case StudyBoachie-Mensah, Francis O; Seidu, Peter Awini1. IntroductionIn today's competitive business world, it is understood that organizations can only compete with their rivals by innovating, and organizations can be innovative by managing their human resources well. The human resource system can become more effective by having a valid and accurate appraisal system used for rating performances of employees (Armstrong, 2003; Bohlander &Snell, 2004). Unfortunately, the number of organizations using an effective performance appraisal system (PAS) is limited (Hennessey &Bernadin, 2003).Perceptions of employees about the targets, outcomes and uses of performance appraisal (PA) results would be beneficial depending on a number of factors. For example, employees are more likely to be receptive and supportive of a given PA programme if they perceive the process as a useful source of feedback which helps to improve their performance (Mullins, 2007). Employees are likely to embrace and contribute meaningfully to a given PA scheme if they perceive it as an opportunity for promotion, and as an avenue for personal development opportunities, a chance to be visible and demonstrate skills and abilities, and an opportunity to network with others in the organisation. On the other hand, if employees perceive PA as an unreasonable attempt by management to exercise closer supervision and control over tasks they(employees) perform, various reactions may result. PA will be effective if the appraisal process is clearly explained to, and agreed by the people involved (Anthony et al., 1999). Without adequate explanation or consultation, PA could turn counterproductive. In addition, staff motivation, attitude and behaviour development, communicating and aligning individual and organisational aims, and fostering positive relationships between management and staff are essential for successful appraisal (Armstrong, 2003).In order to obtain accurate PA information, raters must provide objective and unbiased ratings of employees. Due to difficulty in developing an accurate performance checklist, managers' subjective opinions are frequently called for. Many organizations use some combination of subjective and objective assessment for actual PA. Yet, there are numerous problems in actual assessment of employee performance (Corbett &Kenny, 2001). The existence of such problems suggests that PAS may be fraught with biases or errors, resulting in compromised evaluations of employees' accomplishments and capabilities. And the PAS of the institution of study might not be an exception. For a PAS to be perceived as fair, it must be free of bias. It is known that appraisal errors can harm perceptions of pay system fairness by confusing the relationship between true performance differences (Miceli et al., 1991). The importance of effective PA in organizations cannot be over emphasized as appraisals help develop individuals, improve organizational performance and feed into business planning. An understanding of the phenomenon, therefore, in every sector of human endeavor is imperative. This recognition has raised interest in studying people's perceptions of the quality of PA in organizations (educational institutions inclusive). There, however, seems to be a paucity of credible data on the quality of PA in Ghana's educational sector. The Ghanaian situation is relatively unexamined in genreacademic literature. This makes it difficult to fashion an appropriate management intervention to address any existing problem, because the exact dimensions of the challenge and its causes are not known. It is against this backdrop that this study was undertaken. It sought to assess the level of perceived PA biases in the educational sector in Ghana by analysing employees' perceptions of PA in one of the ten polytechnics in the country. The study sought to examine PA from the perspective of employees' perceptions of errors with the view to gathering and analysing information that could assist in development of innovative approaches to achieve both individual and corporate goals. Findings of the study would help fill the gap in extant literature. The findings would also provide useful insights and guidelines for enhancing the quality of PA in organizations.2. Literature Review2.1 The process and purpose of performance appraisalStudies show that there are many approaches for evaluating employee behaviour and performance with respect to job tasks and/or organisational culture. As a result, various applications of PA have left many managers in a state of confusion and frustration with the employee evaluation process (Gurbuz &Dikmenli, 2007). This situation seems to negatively impact the popularity of appraisal systems in many organizations. Most people support the concept and purpose of PA, in spite of their concerns about the process and application of appraisal outcomes by managers (Grote, 1996). The biggest complaint from managers is that they are not given sufficient guidelines to assess people; and the biggest complaint from employees is that the process is not equitable and fair. PA concentrates much in assessing past behaviours of employees, a situation some managers exploit to victimise unfavoured employees (Bersin, 2008). Timing of appraisal; Selection of appraisers and Providing feedback(Scullen et al., 2003). Early PA processes were fairly simple, and involved ranking and comparing individuals with other people (Milkovich &Boudreau 1997). However, these early person-based appraisal systems were fraught with problems. As a result, a transition to job-related performance assessments continues to occur. Thus, PA is being modified from being person-focused to behaviour-oriented, with emphasis on those tasks or behaviours associated with the performance of a particular job (Wellbourne etb al., 1998).Regarding the purpose of PA, Cleveland et al. (1989) describe four types of uses of performance appraisal: between person, within person, system maintenance and documentation. Between person uses are what have been referred to as administrative purposes, consisting of recognition of individuals' performance to make decisions regarding salary administration, promotions, retention, termination, layoffs and so forth. Within person uses are those identified in Management by Objectives (MBO), such as feedback on performance strengths and weaknesses to identify training needs and determine assignments and transfers. PA also helps in organisational goals, which are referred to as system maintenance uses. Finally, documentation purposes are to meet the legal requirements by documenting HR decisions and conducting validation research on the PA tools. Some organizations are attempting to meet all of these goals simultaneously while they continue to use tools that were designed for one type of purpose (Wiese &Buckley, 1998). Jawahar and Williams's (1997) findings suggest that ratings collected for administrative purposes are more lenient than ratings for research or developmental purposes. Although rating scale formats, training and other technical qualities of PA influence the quality of ratings, the quality of PA is also strongly affected by the administrative context in which they are used (Murphy &Cleveland, 1995). Effective managers recognise PAS as a tool for managing, ratherthan a tool for measuring subordinates. Such managers use PA to motivate, direct and develop subordinates, and to maximise access to important resources in the organisation to improve productivity.2.2 Rater issuesResearchers have shown considerable interest in variables related to the individual doing the appraisal (Lefkowitz, 2000; Levy &Williams, 2004; Robbins &DeNisi, 1998). One of the most studied rater variables is rater affect (Levy &Williams, 2004).A general definition of affect involves liking or positive regard for one's subordinate (Lefkowitz, 2000). Forgas and George's (2001) study suggests that affective states impact on judgements and behaviours and, in particular, affect or mood plays a large role when tasks require a degree of cognitive processing. In PA, raters in good mood tend to recall more positive information from memory and appraise performance positively (Sinclair, 1988). Affective regard is related to frequently higher appraisal ratings, less inclination to punish subordinates, better supervisor-subordinate relationships, greater halo, and less accuracy (.Lefkowitz, 2000). Antonioni and Park (2001) found that affect was more strongly related to rating leniency in upward and peer ratings than it was in traditional top-down ratings. This effect was stronger when raters had observational time with their subordinates.A second broad area related to raters is the motivation of the rater. Traditionally, researchers seemed to assume that raters were motivated to rate accurately, and that the problems with the appraisal process involved cognitive processing errors and complexities (Levy &Williams, 2004). This position has, however, been questioned, leading to attempts to identify and understand other elements of raters' motivation and how such motivation affects the appraisal process. The issues involved include individual differences and the rating purpose on rating leniency. Most practitionersreport overwhelming leniency on the part of their raters, and this rating elevation has been found in empirical papers as well as surveys of organizations (Murphy &Cleveland, 1995; Villanova et al., 1993; Bernadin et al., 2000). The role of attribution in the PA process has also attracted recent research attention on how the attribution that raters make of ratees' behaviours affect their motivation to rate or their actual rating (Struthers et al., 1998). Raters consider ratees' behaviours and their reputations when drawing attributional inferences and deciding on appropriate rewards (Johnson et al., 2002). This implies that attributional processing is an important element of the rating process, and these attributions, in part, determine raters' reactions and ratings. Another aspect of rater motivation has to do with rater accountability (Frink &Ferris, 1998). Klimoski and Inks (1990) posit that raters distort appraisal ratings more when they are to be held accountable to the ratee for those ratings. They emphasise that accountability can result in distortions of performance ratings. This view is confirmed by other research findings (Mero et al., 2003; Shore &Tashchian, 2002). There have also been calls from practitioners to use accountability as a means of improving the accuracy of appraisal ratings, increasing acceptance of the appraisal system, and making the HR system more efficient (Digh, 1998).2.3 Ratee issuesA second major focus of PA research relates to the role of PA in ratee motivation and ratee reactions to PA processes. The research focusing on motivation is generally categorised as being about either (1) the links between performance ratings and rewards or (2) those elements of the PA process which increase ratees' motivation, such as participation (Levy &Williams, 2004; Goss, 2001; Campbell et al., 1998). One theme of some recent work is that although merit pay systems sound like agood idea, there is very little evidence indicating that they are at all successful (Goss, 2001). In spite of its intuitive appeal and theoretical support, merit pay plans seldom reach their objectives (Campbell et al., 1998). Mani (2002) argues that while pay is an important motivator along with recognition, work enjoyment, and self-motivation, very few organizations actually link the PAS to pay or compensation in any clear, tangible way. Starcher (1996) contends that how well employees perform is much more a function of the situational constraints they experience than their own skills or motivation. But Levy and Williams (1998) argue that these situational constraints are not so important to exclude social or motivational factors that have been quite clearly linked to employee satisfaction and productivity over the years.译文员工对绩效考核系统的感知:一个案例研究门萨；弗朗西斯；彼得1 引言在如今竞争日益激烈的商业世界，据悉，组织只有通过创新才能与竞争对手竞争，尤其是组织人力资源方面的创新。
员工激励外文翻译文献
员工激励外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Employee Motivation: A Powerful New ModelBy Nitin Nohria, Boris Groysberg & Linda-Eling LeeHow to create the best employee performance is manager for a long time of challenge. In recent years, the neural science, biology and evolution of interdisciplinary research areas such as psychology, humans have told us four basic emotional needs, and the force driving or what we all the basis of their behavior. The empirical research shows that, but the employee can create better performance. Therefore, to motivate employees, managers should understand the driving force and can take what measures to meet the driving force.Acquirement: Get people always try to get some things, to increase the scarcity of his happiness. When the force satisfied, we will feel happy. Conversely, it will feel dissatisfied. This force is often the relative (we always compare themselves with others), and it was difficult to satisfy (we always want more).Combination: Many animals are combined with their parents and relatives or close relationship between population, but establish the relationship between human expanded into larger groups, such as organization, community and nation. "Driving", people will generate loving, caring, strong positive emotions, etc. Conversely, it will appear as negative emotional loneliness cynical. In the work environment, when the staff for oneself is a member of the organization are proud of their motivation and will greatly improve, And when they had rebelled against their will and morale.Understand: We are eager to understand about the world around them, and then put forward various theories to explain all things, and put forward the reasonable action and countermeasures. When things seem pointless, we will feel frustrated, While looking for answers to questions, the challenge will let us full of passion. In the working environment, workers work done if challenging, and allows them to grow and learn, they will be incentive, And when they do look no value or no future, will be demoralized.Defense: In the face of threats defense, to protect themselves, to protect our property and achievements, family and friends, thoughts and beliefs, it is natural to us. This force is rooted in the "fight but fled" basic response, this is common, but most animals to humans, it not only the offensive or defensive behavior, but also to build a system to promote seek justice, clear goals and intention, and allow people to speak freely. These forces have been fulfilled, people think and self-confidence otherwise will fear and hate strong negative affection.These four driving are independent of each other, no secondary, also cannot substitute mutually. To fully motivate employees, managers must satisfy all four driving force. In fact, every emotional force can use different organizations leverage to satisfy the most effectively.Reward System: "gain" the most easily through the organization of driving system of rewards. Of course, it also depends on the organization's reward system can effectively define employee performance, will reward with different performance, and give the best chance of promotion of personnel.Culture: If it meet the "combination" force among employees, cultivating strong friendship, the most effective way is to establish a promote teamwork, cooperation, open and friendly culture.Post designing: It is satisfied with “understanding” force that it is the optimal way to design a meaningful and have fun and challenging positions.Performance management and resource allocation process fairness, credible, transparent, performance management and resource allocation process, help satisfy people's "defensive driving".In addition, the direct supervisor for employees and motivational degrees plays an important role as organizational policy. Although do not expect to staff the whole company boss incentive system, culture, post design or management system exerting significant effect, but they clearly superior in their influence within the scope of a certain power. For example, in recognition, managers can select and tasks, the rewards and employee performance.In the organization of managers only under the condition of the utmost efforts to satisfy all four driving force, the employee can most effectively improve the incentive effect on employees, improve the organizational performance.Copyright © 2008 Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation. All rights reserved.Talent "flow" and "left"By Peter Cappelli 2003-05-01For other company employees openly, it rarely occur in the past, but now it is already used the enterprise. The rapidly changing demands of the market rapidly changing constantly updated the organization. However, no one is willing to see his talent was away. Once the excellent employees leave, the enterprise will hit. If hope to help enterprises package and career development plan, training programs, like tinkering with the free flow of his talent market today, affirmation in isolation. Now, we have a choice: that is attractive to market-oriented strategy. This strategy, long-term, defies generalizations for employee loyalty is neither possible nor necessary, the enterprise can definitely need to keep employees and leave them what how attractive scheme, will focus on the talent to keep up.Today, many enterprises in staff loyalty are dependent on salary, but many attractive salary is a kind of mechanism. Other personnel loss can be used to reduce the method is: the post to design - the United States through the heavy UPS tedious work load from the driver package for other employee, stripping there was more to keep the driver, To cultivate employees work or specific project team loyalty, Hire skills in talent market demand is not high on the staff, The staff in the work place much temptation job-hopping, And other companies to provide staff into pairs across the company's career path. If there is no way to prevent loss of personnel, the enterprise can also use outsourcing, strengthen job, workwill hire employees and standardization, cross training around theshort-term organizational work, etc.If the past management methods of retaining staff to maintain a fixed water dam, so the new management methods are more like a flowing rivers, dredge its goal is to prevent water flow, but the flow direction and speed control.Copyright © 2003 Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation. All rights reserved.Let who evaluate staffBy Frederick F. Reichheld & Paul Rogers 2005-11-01In the era of wooden, transport and the crew that recruits the appropriate command them to the same direction with traces the OARS will not be easy. In the past, the captain of the common approach is waving the whip crew. Now, in this business, enterprise how to motivate employees when?Recently, in order to solve the problem of all kinds of organization is a constant headache, some companies began to staff’s compensation and team performance hook, let the customer and employee's supervisor to assess performance instead. These examples:In the enterprise, the branch managers, employees want to get promotion, they belong to the service quality team to achieve or exceedthe average company, or any single people could not get a promotion. This company USES the performance index called "enterprise rental company service quality index", its meaning for customer service in asking whether satisfaction, what percentage of people playing a full five points.Applebee restaurants have difference to finding the best performance, 20% of the staff is divided into general 60%, performance and 20% of the worst performance, and separately calculated the loss. If managers can successfully hold the top 80% of the employee performance, it can obtain the reward. If the 20% of employees for worst performance, the managers will not be punished accordingly.Copyright © 2005 Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation. All rights reserved.译文：员工激励的“四力模型”作者：尼廷・诺里亚，鲍里斯・格鲁斯伯格，琳达－埃琳・李如何让员工创造出最佳绩效是管理者长久以来面临的严峻挑战。
社区银行经营绩效中英文对照外文翻译文献
社区银行经营绩效中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)原文:Efficiency Ratios and Community Bank PerformanceFred H. HaysUniversity of Missouri—Kansas CityStephen A. De LurgioUniversity of Missouri—Kansas CityArthur H. Gilbert, Jr.University of West FloridaAbstractThis study develops a multivariate discriminate model to differentiate between low efficiency and high efficiency community banks (less than $1 billion in total assets) based upon the efficiency ratio, a commonly used financial performance measure that relates non-interest expenses to total operating income. The model includes proxies for the banking regulatory CAMELS rating variables including: the equity capital to total asset ratio, net charge-offs to loans, salaries to average assets, return on average assets, the liquidity ratio and the one year GAP ratio. The discriminate model is tested using data for 2006, 2007 and 2008. This includes periods of high performance as well as deteriorating industry conditions associated with the current financial c risis. The model’s classification accuracy ranges from approximately 88% to 96% for both original and cross-validation datasets.Keywords Efficiency ratio, community bank, CAMELS; discriminate analysis; financial crisisIntroductionThe global economic and financial crisis initially affected large financial institutions like Citibank, Bank of America and Wachovia. As the effects spread throughout the U.S. economy, especially during the latter part of 2008, smaller institutions, including about7,000 community banks (with under $1 billion in assets measured at the individual bank level rather than the bank holding company level) have been affected as well. Community banks are characterized by not only their relatively small size but also their focus on local banking markets rather than regional, national or global markets.While sub prime lending is frequently cited as a catalyst for current banking problems, community banks have been adversely affected by a decrease in liquidity in the overall financial system as well as deterioration in traditional residential real estate loans, commercial and industrial loans and consumer loans including credit cards and student loans. Overall profitability in the banking industry has plunged from near record highs in 2006 to an industry loss of $32.1 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008, a -0.94% quarterly return on average assets. (FDIC Quarterly Banking Report, Fourth Quarter 2008). For all of 2008 total industry profits were a mere $10.2 billion, a year-to-year reduction of almost 90%. Net interest margins for community banks fell to the lowest levels in 20 years.Even before the recent financial crisis, the number of banks in the US declined by about half since 1980. Most of these were community banks. Predictions of their total demise have not materialized. Changes in technology, fierce competition and changing population demographics have not eliminated their presence. These forces do raise questions, however, about the ability of the least efficient to continue to operate.This study looks at factors that differentiate efficient from inefficient community banks using the efficiency ratio, a popular tool used by bank financial analysts. The efficiency ratio measures the level of non-interest expense needed to support one dollar of operating revenue, consisting of both interest income and non-interest or fee income. The value of the efficiency ratio can be influenced by changes in salaries and benefits, labor productivity, technology, utilization of physical facilities especially branch offices along with many other factors including economies or diseconomies of scale.The analytical framework in this study is based on the CAMELS rating system, a device created by federal banking regulators to assess the overall performance of commercial banks (Rose, 2010). The CAMELS acronym stands for Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management, Earnings and Liquidity. Regulators created an additional measure, Sensitivity, to evaluate market risk associated with changing interest rates and other factors. This study uses proxy variables to represent each of these dimensions of bank performance.This study also employs multiple discriminate analysis to investigate the differences between high efficiency and low efficiency banks based upon the level of the efficiencyratio. A model is developed that demonstrates substantial differences between high and low efficiency banks. The model is tested using year-end data for 2006, 2007 and 2008. This incorporates periods of high profitability as well as the negative effects of the financial crisis on recent periods including year-end 2008 when the brunt of the current crisis hit. This is the most recent data currently available.Bank profitability as measured by return on average assets (ROAA) in Chart 1 was at near record levels from the late 1990’s until the end of 2006. Beginning in 2007 ROAA began to deteriorate rapidly. The decline in asset quality in 2008 forced banks to increase their provisions for loan losses which further reduced profits.Chart 2 depicts both the increase in non-current loans (loans 90 days or more past due) and net charge-offs (loans that have been deemed to be uncollectible). While non-current loan rates were considerably higher in the early 1990’s during the Savings and Loan and Banking Crises compared with the levels at year-end 2008, the level of actual charge-offs in 2008 exceeded the highest level in the early 1990’s.The efficiency ratio is calculated by dividing overhead expenses by the sum of net interest income and non-interest or fee income. It is a measure of how effective a bank is in using overhead expenses including salaries and benefit costs and occupancy expenses as well as other operating expenses in generating revenues. Other things being equal, a decrease in the efficiency ratio is viewed as a positive while a rising efficiency ratio is generally undesirable. The efficiency ratio can rise temporarily when a bank expands facilities. For example, opening a new branch immediately adds to overhead costs including staffing. New loans may not be immediately forthcoming. Fee income may be slow developing as well. As a result there can be a short-term spike in the efficiency ratio.Chart 3 shows the differences between the efficiency ratios for community banks with assets less than $1 billion and larger regional and national banks. The efficiency ratio for community banks has risen by almost 10% since the late 1990’s. The increase has been particularly notable since 2005. By contrast, efficiency ratios for banks in excess of $1 billion in assets are actually lower at year-end 2008 than in 1998. Among other things, this may reflect the growing consolidation of large banking organizations during this period as organizations such as Nations Bank and Bank of America merged. It may also include the effects of merging banks with non-bank financial institutions including insurance companies (such as Traveler’s merging with Citicorp) that became possible after passage of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act in late 1999.The economies of scope and scale may reduce average costs and result in lower efficiency ratios.Efficiency ratios are subject to controls of overhead expenses as implemented by senior management and the board of directors. Economic theory assumes that managers will seek to reduce overhead expenses in an attempt to maximize profits. Edwards (1977) offers an opposing view that bank management may choose to maximize utility rather than profitability. This expense preference theory has been developed in bank management literature. Williamson (1963) notes that management may increase “staff expenditures, managerial emoluments and discretionary profits” rather than focus strictly on maximizing profits. If management prefers larger staffs or more locations, this is normally reflected in the short term in higher efficiency ratios. Such decisions may or may not contribute to long-run profitability.Review of LiteratureLiterature on community bank performance, especially related to efficiency and bank strategy continues to expand. The following discussion summarizes some research in this area over the past decade. Wall (1985) examined small and medium sized banks from the early 1970’s until deregulation occurred in the early 1980’s. He found that profitable banks had lower interest and non interest expense than less profitable banks. In addition, the more profitable banks had lower cost of funds, greater use of transactions deposits, more marketable securities and higher capital levels.Gup and Walter (1989) found that consistently profitable small banks stressed basic banking with low cost funds and high quality investments. The study examined banks from 1982 to 1987 during the early stages of bank deregulation. During this period there were considerable differences between regions due to declining energy, real estate and commodity prices. High performance banks during this period made higher quality loans, held proportionately more capital, invested more in securities (especially long-term) and relied on lower cost funding sources compared with the average small bank.Zimmerman (1996) examined community bank performance in California during the early 1990’s, a period of slow recovery for these institutions. Excessive reliance on real estate lending caused deterioration in asset quality which reduced overall profitability. Lack of geographic diversification further compounded community bank performance.Two different studies by Bassett and Brady (2001; 2002) examined recent performance of community banks. The 2001 study found that many small banks from 1985-2000 vanished through mergers and acquisitions. Increased competition with stock, bond and mutual fund investments may have weakened the competitive position of small banks. These community banks, nevertheless, were able to compete effectively againstlarger banks due in part to superior knowledge of local loan markets combined with a reluctance of customers to bank with out-of area institutions. Bassett and Brady’s (2002) study found that small banks grew more rapidly than large banks from 1985-2001 with profitability remained at a high level. While interest costs increased, this was more than offset by higher returns on earning assets.Gilbert and Sierra (2003) used the Federal Reserve System for Estimating Examination Ratings (SEER) surveillance system to estimate the probability of failure for community banks (which they define as less than $1 billion in assets) versus large banks (with assets greater than $1 billion). The failure probability declined for both groups during the 1990’s. The risk of failure since about 1997 rose slightly for community banks and as of 2003 were about 4 basis points higher than for large banks.Myers and Spong (2003) examined community bank growth in the 10th Federal Reserve District (Kansas City) with an emphasis on economic conditions in slower growing markets. These slower growing markets presented problems in loan quality as well as staffing including senior management and directors. Community banks in low growth markets experienced higher overhead costs relative to income than banks in higher growth markets.DeYoung, Hunter and Udell (2003) provided an extensive investigation of community bank performance commencing in the early 1970’s. They concluded that while many community banks have left the industry in the past three decades, many more inefficient banks must still exit in order for those remaining to be competitive with their larger bank counterparts.Critchfield, Davis, Davison, Gratton, Hanc and Samolyk (2005) in a study of past, present and future community bank performance conducted for the FDIC concluded that community banks continue to be of interest because 1) they still constitute over 90% of all banks,2) they are economically important to small business and agricultural lending and 3) they represent a disproportionately large percentage of FDIC failure costs.MethodologyThis study examines the performance of low efficiency vs. high efficiency community banks using data from year-end 2006-2008. High vs. low efficiency is defined in terms of the efficiency ratio, a commonly used measure of bank performance. The efficiency ratio (ER) is non-interest expenses divided by the sum of interest income and non-interest income (fee income). A higher ratio value indicates relative inefficiency while a lower value indicates greater efficiency. Inefficiency can be the result of overstaffing, excessivesalaries and benefits, investments in new branches that have yet to become profitable along with other reasons. In this study we use a “polar extremes approach” that defines high and low efficiency banks while eliminating the middle group. For additional discussion of this approach to discriminate analysis see Hair et.al. (1998).Efficient banks are defined as those with efficiency ratios (ER) less than 51 while inefficient banks are those with efficiency ratios greater than 81. This corresponds to one standard deviation below and above the mean ER of 66.Community banks are defined in this study as banks with total assets less than or equal to one billion dollars. This cutoff value is consistent with many current studies of community bank performance. To assure that special purpose banks such as credit card banks are excluded from the study, only banks with loan to deposit ratios greater than 25% and less than 125% are included. To eliminate problems associated with de novo (newly chartered) banks, an additional constraint that banks be chartered prior to December 31, 2002 was applied.After applying the previous screening parameters, the result is 739 low efficiency banks and 674 high efficiency banks, the universe of U.S. banks that meet the screening criteria described above. Data are obtained from a relational database available by subscription from SNL Financial. The data are based on quarterly reports by commercial banks and bank holding companies filed with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and published in the FDIC Reports of Condition and Income.The Model and ResultsThe CAMELS rating system was developed by federal banking regulators as a composite measure of overall commercial bank performance. Bank management and the board of directors receive an aggregate performance score on a scale of 1-5 where 1 is the highest rating and 5 is the lowest. Banks rated 4 or 5 are considered “problem banks” and are severely limited in their operations by their respective regulators. These ratings may require obtaining additional capital, limitations on interest rates paid on deposit liabilities, limitations on dividend distributions, etc. Under the prompt corrective action requirements of the FDIC Improvement Act of 1991, banks in the problem bank categories must respond quickly or face closure (Rose, 2010).Banks are also evaluated by federal or state regulators on individual performance elements including capital adequacy, asset quality, management, earnings, liquidity and sensitivity to market fluctuations (especially interest rate risk exposure). Deficiencies are reported to management and the board of directors for corrective action. These ratings arenot, however, reported to the public because of concern that such knowledge might precipitate excessive withdrawals of bank deposits creating a “run” on a troubled bank and perhaps impairing public confidence in the overall banking system (Lopez, 1999).The CAMELS variables can be easily approximated. Such proxies are common in commercial banking literature. Of the six CAMELS variables, the measurement of “management” is the most subjective since it is normally evaluated and assigned a score by the bank examination staff. In our study we use the ratio of salaries and benefits to average assets as a proxy for management since salaries and benefits are generally the largest non-interest expense element of bank overhead and are also controllable by management.The final linear discriminate model contains the following six CAMELS variables: Z= α +β 1 E2TA +β2 NCO2L +β 3 SalAA + β4 ROAA + β5 LiqR + β6 1yrGAP (1) Where:α = ConstantE2TA= Equity Capital to Total Assets (Capital)NCO2L= Net Loan Charge-offs to Loans (Asset quality)SalAA= Salaries and benefits to Avg. Assets (Management)ROAA= Return on Average Assets (Earnings)LiqR= Liquidity ratio (Liquidity)1yrGAP= GAP ratio, 1 year (Sensitivity to market changes)These variables are listed in order of relative importance based on the structure matrix presented in Table 4 with Return on Average Assets (ROAA) representing the most important. The first four variables retain the same relative ranking in all three years; The liquidity ratio (LiqR) is ranked fifth in 2006 but is ranked last in 2007 and 2008. Based on banking theory and empirical studies these variables appear reasonable discriminators between low efficiency and high efficiency banks. For example, one would intuitively expect that a low efficiency bank would have by definition higher average overhead costs associated with overstaffing, low worker productivity, high investments in bricks and mortar facilities, older technology, etc. This cost disadvantage would be expected to lower profits as measured by return on average assets compared with high efficiency banks. Indeed, the mean ROAA for low efficiency banks ranges between -.286% to .3245 while the ROAA for high efficiency banks ranges from 1.0% to 1.726%. (Table 1) An important factor affecting profitability is the ratio of salaries and benefits to average assets (SalAA). Low efficiency banks have an average SalAA ratio as high as of 2.361% in 2007 which is substantially higher than the 1.291% for high efficiency banks in2006. (Table 1)Asset quality is an important issue for most banks. While it is seldom profitable (or even desirable) to totally eliminate credit risk, it is important that this risk be properly managed and controlled within reasonable limits. A proxy for asset quality is the loan charge-off to loan ratio. Charge-offs occurs when management deems a loan to be uncollectible. Sometimes regulators pressure banks to write down loans when credit conditions deteriorate. As rule of thumb, a typical charge-off ratio based on historical averages is at or less than one percent. Both groups are substantially below that benchmark target. Low efficiency banks have a value of about 65% while high efficiency banks are even lower at 23%. (Table 1)Banking regulators monitor the capital positions of banks quite closely. Since banks, by their nature, are highly leveraged institutions, a decrease in the ratio of equity capital to total assets would also reduce the cushion that banks have to absorb credit or market related losses.When the capital ratio declines, the risk that the deposit insurance fund might be required to pay insured depositors rises. This creates a built-in tension between the desire of shareholders to use leverage to magnify returns on equity vs. the desire of regulators to insure the safety and soundness of the banking system. During the period from 2006-2008 low efficiency banks on average held smaller percentages of capital than did higher efficiency banks.Liquidity is the ability of a bank to provide cash in the face of unanticipated withdrawals of deposits or for other reasons. Banks earn nothing on assets held as cash. Other assets such as reserves held at the Federal Reserve have historically not earned a return (although recent changes allow the Fed to pay a small positive return on reserve balances). Banks hold secondary reserves in the form of highly marketable securities, in particularly U.S. Treasury bills, notes and bonds.Banks are subject to the vagaries of interest rate changes. Since bank deregulation commenced in 1980 with passage of the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act (DIDMCA), banks have moved toward asset/liability management systems. These generally identify and track rate sensitive assets and liabilities. These are assets and liabilities that either mature or reprice within a given time period. If a bank has more rate sensitive assets than liabilities and interest rates rise, a bank’s net interest margin would improve; if rates fall, the bank’s net interest margin would shrink. GAP management techniques that manage the relationship between rate sensitive assets and rate sensitive liabilities are utilized to manage the bank’s interest rate risk. While some banks use ashorter time interval such as one quarter, because of data constraints a one year GAP ratio is incorporated in the model.Classification AccuracyUltimately any discriminate model is judged by its ability to correctly classify observations into their correct groups. The model discussed above correctly classifies 92.7% in 2006, 96.2% in 2007 and 88.1% in 2008 [Table 2]. The 2008 results appear to be affected by overall deteriorating economic and financial conditions as both high efficiency and low efficiency banks suffered declining asset quality.This study uses the “hold-one out” cross validation procedure contained within SPSS 16.0 which sequentially withholds an observation and repeatedly refits the model. The classificatory accuracy of the cross-validation approach is virtually the same as with the original dataset. [Table 2]Two observations should be made about the classification results. First, while the group sizes are not precisely the same (n low=739 and n high= 674) they are approximately the same percentages (52.3% vs. 47.7%). Second, the overall classification accuracy is so high (from about 88% to over 96%) that traditional measures such as proportional chance criterion and Press’s Q overwhelmingly confirm the discriminatory power of the model.The critical Z value or optimal cutting score for the discriminate function represents the dividing line separating the two groups. A Z score can be calculated for every bank in the study based on information on its values for all six discriminate variables. This individual score can then be compared to the critical Z value to determine into which group the bank belongs. The formula for the critical Z score for unequal group sizes is Zcu = (n A Z B+n B Z A)/(n A+ n B) which Z A and Z B are the group cancroids’ and n A and n B are the number of banks in each group.1 The critical Z score for our model is 0000478. [(-.831*674 + .757*739)/1413] The separation between groups can be seen in Exhibit 1 using 2006 data which displays a plot of group cancroids’.Additional Analysis of ResultsTable 3 contains results of tests of equality of group means for variables related to high vs. low efficiency banks for 2006-2008. The top three ranked variables are respectively 1) Return on Average Assets (ROAA), 2) Salary and Benefit Expense to Average Assets (SalAA) and 3) Equity to Average Assets (E2TA) as indicated by the structure matrix in Table 4.The one year GAP measure was not statistically significant in any of the periods.Moreover, the GAP ratio was ranked fifth or sixth in each period based on the structure matrix data in Table 4. The equity to asset ratio (E2A) shows a statistically significant difference between low and high efficiency banks for 2006 and 2007. For 2008, however, the differences are not significant. The liquidity ratio (LR) is statistically different in 2006 but not in 2007 or 2008.Wilks’ Lambda and 2 test statistics contained in Table 5 indicate the overall model is highly significant at the =.000 level in all three periods from 2006-2008.ConclusionThis study uses a commonly used measure of bank performance, the efficiency ratio, as a basis for identifying low versus high efficiency banks. It utilizes a linear multivariate discriminate model to identify variables that differentiate between these two groups. In addition to profitability as measured by return on average assets, other important variables include salaries to average assets, the liquidity ratio, the equity capital to asset ratio, loan charge-offs to loans and a one year GAP measure.Community banks that desire to survive and thrive should pay attention to these variables. Most of these are strategic variables over which management and the board of directors have considerable control. Staffing issues, decisions about deposit mix, credit standards, and quality and branching decisions are within the scope of managerial decision-making. While the liquidity ratio is partly determined by exogenous factors such as market loan demand, competition and the stage of the business cycle, it is controllable within limits. The future for community banks favors those that are sufficiently adept at understanding operating efficiency. The ability to compete with larger institutions with greater resources depends on it. As the banking industry recovers from the current economic and financial crisis, attention must be paid to efficiency as a potential strategic advantage.Journal of Finance and Accountancy译文:效率比率与社区银行的经营绩效摘要本研究利用多元化的判别模型来区分的低效率和高效率的社区银行（总资产不到10亿美元）根据效率比率，以及非利息支出，营业总收入等常用测量财务业绩的方法。
员工对绩效考核系统的感知外文文献翻译最新译文
员工对绩效考核系统的感知外文文献翻译最新译文The ___ can only stay ahead of their rivals by being innovative。
and a key aspect of this is having a valid and accurate performance appraisal system (PAS) in place to rate employee performance (Armstrong。
2003.Bohlander & Snell。
2004)。
However。
it is ___ (___。
2003).2.___Aperformanceappraisalsystem(PAS)___ Dessler (2005)。
___ and potential。
The PAS is a critical tool in the human resource management process that ___ weaknesses。
and to provide feedback on how employees can improve their performance。
It also helps to align employee performance with the overall goals of the n (Dessler。
2005.Armstrong。
2003).3.___This ___ research method that involves the n and analysis of data from a single case or a small number of cases (Yin。
2003)。
A purposive sampling technique was used to select participants for the study。
绩效考核中英文对照外文翻译文献
绩效考核中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)绩效考核与员工满意摘要：绩效考核通常也称为业绩考评或“考绩”，是针对企业中每个职工所承担的工作，应用各种科学的定性定量的方法，对职工行为的实际效果及其对企业的贡献或价值进行考评。
绩效考核作为一种有效的企业管理手段，在企业管理中发挥着非常重要的作用，是企业人力资源管理的核心。
本文对当前我国绩效考核中存在的问题做了详细的分析。
针对问题，文章提出从绩效考核的各个角度进行控制，从而确保绩效考核高效到位，最终发挥人力资源管理的作用。
关键词：绩效考核问题分析建议21世纪是知识经济时代，随着经济竞争的加剧，人们越来越认识到人力资源是当今时代经济发展的第一资源。
随着人力资源管理在中国企业的发展的日趋成熟,绩效管理作为人力资源管理的重要组成部分在企业内部的地位也越发重要。
绩效考核是人力资源管理的核心问题之一，是保障并促进企业内部管理机制有序运转，实现企业各项经营管理目标所必须进行的一种管理行为。
美国组织行为学家约翰·伊凡斯维其认为，绩效考核可以达到以下八个方面的目的：为员工的晋升、降职、调职和离职进行评估；组织对员工的绩效考评的反馈；对员工和团队对组织的贡献进行评估；为员工的薪酬决策提供依据；对招聘选择和工作分配的决策进行评估；了解员工和团队的培训和教育的需要；了解员工和团队的培训和教育的需要；对工作计划、预算评估和人力资源规划提供信息。
绩效考核是企业管理员工的有效手段,也是主要途径,在企业管理中具有不可替代的核心地位。
但是,现在有很多企业的绩效考核与企业的发展策略相脱节,企业绩效考核体系也只是一个空壳而已,根本达不到对员工进行考核的目的,甚至还适得其反,导致人才流失。
因此，对企业的绩效考核工作进行分析，找出存在的问题，并解决这些问题成为企业势在必行的工作。
1当前绩效考核中存在问题及原因分析1.1对绩效考核的认识不充分（1）认为绩效考核只是人力资源部的事。
员工绩效考核方案-中英文对照
员工绩效考核方案-中英文对照PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PLAN员工绩效考核方案1. General Principles总则In order to standardize the performance appraisal policy of MFC, the Compan y constituted this plan. 为规范公司对员工的考察与评价，特制定本制度。
2. Objective考核目的2.1 To bring up a professional talent group with high agglomeration and tea m building spirit. The talent management system shall be guided by perform ance appraisal.在公司造就一支业务精干的具有高度凝聚力和团队精神的人才队伍，并形成以考核为核心导向的人才管理机制。
2.2 To evaluate the past performance promptly and equitably, affirming achie vements, finding out problems and preparing for the improvements on next phases. 及时、公正地对员工过去一段时间的工作绩效进行评估，肯定成绩，发现问题，为下一阶段工作绩效的改进做好准备。
2.3 An empowerment tool to involve employee in managing own performance especially in obtaining feedback.为员工自我管理提供相应手段，特别是能得到绩效反馈。
2.4 To support an employee’s efforts of successful development and supply t he personal information and decision gist on salary, welfare(including stock o ption )adjustment and training plans.支持员工职业发展，为员工薪酬待遇（含员工持股权调整）以及相关的教育培训提供人事信息与决策依据。
内部营销之间的关系,员工工作满意度与国际饭店绩效外文翻译(可编辑)
内部营销之间的关系，员工工作满意度与国际饭店绩效外文翻译外文翻译原文Relationships among Internal Marketing, Employee Job Satisfaction and International Hotel PerformanceThe concept of internal marketing employed in the service sector is crucial to excellent service provision and successful external marketing whicth calls for an exploration in details. Taking this concept into account, this paperptesens an empirical study on the correlations among internal marketing, employee job satisfaction and organizational performance with respect to international hotels in Taiwan. Findings show significant correlations among internal marketing, employee job satisfaction and performance of international hotels. These findings can provide a basis for futurv academic research of related topics as well as a solid reference for business owners and managers in the service sector Ⅰ. IntroductionSeveral experts Thomas. 1978; Gronroos. 1990; Kotler. 2000 have consecutively proposed a conceptual framework of service marketing known as the "Service Triangle" to incorporate the concepts of Internal Marketing, External Marketing and Interaction Marketing into a more intensive concept, in developing these marketing strategies, attentionshall be given to conventional marketing strategies with the aim of providing services that are unique and acceptable to the external customers to win their loyalty. Attention shall also be given to the value of employees, with the goal of determining them to be a contributory to the overall "organizational capital" of the business. Kotler explains that internal marketing is more important than conventional external marketing. Further, Greene et al., point out that internal marketing is the key to excellent service and to successful external marketing. These two views justify the exploration ofthe marketing concept, i.eInternal Marketing, within a business organization in the service sector. Research reveals that the concept and the action of an enterprise's internal marketing upgrade employee job satisfaction Tansuhaj et al., 1991; Rafig and Ahmed. 2000; Conduit and Mavondo, 2001. and in turn improve the organizational performance of the enterprise Pfeffer and Veiga, 1999; Neheker et al., 2001. This study presents an empirical exploration into the correlations among internal marketing, employee job satisfaction, and organizational performance of the international hotels in Taiwan, and thus to contribute to practical implementation ofthe correlations and additional academic research in the future.Ⅱ. Literature Review1. Implication of Internal MarketingPrevious research about internal marketing can be divided intofour categories:1 Treating the Employee as an Internal Customer. Many experts Sasser and Arbeit, 1976; Berry, 1981; Greene et al. l994:Cahill, 1996; Hultet al., 2000 believe that the task of internal marketing is to view the jobs as products; and employees as customers.2 Developing Employee Customer Orientated Behavior. Piercy and Morgan 1991address the application of marketing skill in the internal marketing of a company. They argue that the company should adopt a framework similar to that of its external marketing and develop a marketing program aimed at the internal market. The goal would be to stimulate service awareness and customer oriented behavior. Many other experts share the same viewpoint Gronroos, 1985;Heskett, l987;Gronroos, 1994; Plefferand Veiga, 1999: Conduit and Mavondo, 2001.3 Human Resource Management HRM Orientation. According to Joseph 1996, internal marketing should be incorporated with HRM theories, technologies and principles. Cooper and Cronin 2000 believe that internal marketing is comprised of efforts within organizations to train and encourage employees to provide better services.4 Internal Exchange. Baketal. 1994 propose that allowing efficient operation of an exchange relationship between the organization and its employees is the first move to arrive at the organization's objectivesin the external market. Cahill 1996, Pitt and Foreman 1999 share similar comments.2. Measuring Job SatisfactionJob Description Index JDI Smith et al., 1969 is the most frequently quoted scale when measuring job satisfaction. The scale includes areas like type of job, remuneration, promotion, superior management, and joh associates. However, Spector 1985 has identified some problems with JDI when it is applied to employees from the service sector. Thus Spector developed the Job Satisfaction Survey JSS that essentially bringing more to the forefront aspects of satisfaction of remuneration, promotion, management styles and relations, welfare, incentive, operation procedures, associate relationships, job description, and communication.3. Measuring an Organization's PerformanceComparatively comprehensive viewpoints on measuring performance of an organization have been introduced since the 197O's. Indices suggested by Campbell 1977 include general performance, productivity, efficiency, profit, quality, absenteeism, job satisfaction, motivation, morality, organizational growth, and market share. By referring to documentation complied on performance of an organization, Venkatraman and Ramanujam 1986 classify the variables in measuring that performance into three groups: I Financial performance sales growth, profitability andearnings per share. 2 Operational performance market share productquality, innovation and intrtduction and new products, marketing effectiveness, added manufacturing value, and technical efficiency; and 3 Organizational performance inclusive of those two performances described above, consideration of stakeboiders, resolution of various conflicting objectives in a mutual mission, and satisfaction of the objectives of stakeholders. In research of performance of an organization relates also to the field of general management face certain problems, including the absence of a consistent standard for performance comparison, difficulties in a confinnation of tbe consequences between the topic of study and tbe objective fmanciai pertortnance figures, the failure to access correct fmanciai information, free of window dressing or manipulation by surplus. Some experts propose the use of subjective performance standards e.gthe subjective recognition or feeling of those interviewed as the index of scale Covin et al., 1990; Delaney and Huselid, 1996 Ⅲ. Analysis of Empirical Results1. Results and Discussions1 Importance of Addressing Internal Marketing in the Service Sector. According to Lovelock 1996. the service sector features highly intensive contact with customers, and the quality of service achieved relies entirely on the impression the customers have ofthe service person employee delivered during the course of providing service Zeithamal and Bitner. 2000. Therefore, experts believe that the organizationalenterprise must make job satisfaction the focus for its internal employees George, 1990 before injecting customer-oriented service commitments into the circumstance/ joh description/job expectation Gronroos, 1985; Heskett. 1987. Before such service employees can he well prepared and achieve sound professional service techniques and competence Cooper and Cronin, 2000; Rafiq and Ahmed, 2X0. Management in the service sector should emphasize the concept and hands-on approach of internal marketing. The international tourism industry is a representative industry, having highly intensive contact with customers. Thus, the importance of introducing into management philosophy both related and feasible measures of internal marketing cannot be overstated.2 Verification of Hypotheses Empirical results from this study linear structure model analysis strongly support all the hypotheses, namely that internal marketing has positive impacts on employee job satisfaction; and that employee job satisfaction and internal marketing both have positive impacts on performance of an organization. There was correlation among all the concepts defined in the hypothetical mode ofthe study, and that correlation attained a significant level and excellent good of fitness.2. Management Implications and ContributionsThe contributions ofthe study to management theory and its implications for practicalmanagement application are summarized asfollows;1 Literature review and an empirical research method were the bases for logical inference from the variables variants of this study. Statistic analysis highly supported the empirical results of the study and would be a suitable reference for subsequent research of topics linked to internal marketing. 2 Through the examination of the correlations among internal marketing, employee job satisfaction, and organizational performance, the intermediate mode, i.e. the relationship of employee job satisfaction to internal marketing and operation performance, as presented by this study can also be a valuable reference in any subsequent studies. 3Service persons employees are the most important resource in the service sector and also the primary marketers who deliver excellent service to the customer. In addition, the service person helps achieve that customer satisfaction, and upgrades the entire pertbmiance ofthe enterprise. Therefore, management should be aggressively engaged in internal marketing to arrive at a synergy of satisfied employees and upgraded organizational performance.译文内部营销之间的关系,员工工作满意度与国际饭店绩效通过一些优良的服务和对外营销细节的成功探索,提出在服务部门就业,内部营销观念是关键。
对巴西酒店员工满意度的研究调查【外文翻译】
本科毕业论文（设计）外文翻译原文：Research on employee satisfaction survey in Brazil HotelsOften, studies on Brazil primarily focused on industry trends and economic issues (Brown 1995; Smith 2003). The country illustrates the entire spectrum of economic development, thus it provides a wealth of research opportunities for management scholars. Bahia is the largest of the coastal states in the North-eastern region of Brazil. Salvador, Bahia’s capital and the colonial capital of the country, has a population of 2.5 million and its tourism industry is second in Brazil only to that of Rio de Janeiro. Salvador is the third largest city in Brazil and accounts for roughly one-sixth of Bahia’s population. We chose the city of Salvador as our study location as it has a highly indigenous population, 60% of its citizens are employed in the service sector and it is representative of the demographic makeup of Bahia. It also reflects Brazil’s cultural mores based on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (1980) of high power distance, collectivism, high uncertainty avoidance, femininity, and a moderate long-term orientation, as indicated by a pre-test of 100 native Salvadorians conducted prior to the study.MethodsSampleFive hotels in Salvador, Brazil comprised the study locations. The hotels were selected to achieve diversity within the sample along severaldimensions. The business models included locally owned operations, national hotel chain members and sole proprietorships to allow variety in type of establishment. Hotels located in both rural and urban settings in different segments of the city were used to optimize variability. Hotel class levels included 2-, 3- and 4- star operations. Hotels ranged in size from 30 rooms to 1,000 rooms. While hotel type, class and location were important for diversity, specific hotels were selected due to accessibility and guest traffic/or average occupancy rates. The more accessible establishments with a 50% occupancy rate were targeted.Managers were contacted in advance for permission to participate in the study. Hotel industry workers were identified for observation, interview, and participation in the study based upon job title and shift assignment. On-the-job observations and personal interviews constituted the primary data collection methods. Interviews continued until theoretical saturation had been achieved. Qualitatively, the number of subjects is contingent upon theoretical saturation of information, thereby, indicating that respondents were revealing no new information beyond that obtained from previous respondents. This procedure is consistent with the recommendations of Glaser and Strauss (1967).Data collectionData collection involved four modalities conducted by three American researchers and one Brazilian assistant over two three-week periods. One of the American researchers was familiar with Bahian culture through acculturation and spoke the Portuguese language fluently. First,hotel employees were observed on the job. Second, primary and follow-up interviews were performed with hotel employees. At the hotels, contract workers commonly offered ancillary services such as transportation andtours for the hotel guests. Third, the contract workers were observed on the job. Fourth, contract workers for the hotels were interviewed. All observations and interviews were conducted using a previously designed in-depth protocol to assureconsistency (Miles, Sledge and Coppage 2005). Interviews were utilized over self-report questionnaires to benefit from face-to-face communication and to allow for explanation of concepts that might be culturally bound or culturally specific. In addition, work environment surroundings together with non-verbal information allowed interviewers to capture reinforcement data on job satisfaction. Furthermore, the observations allowed an additional collection method to minimize the effects of common method variance (Saxton and Dollinger 2004). The structured interview questions requested demographic information such as sex, age, education/preparation, job level/position, job tenure and other factors noted in Table 1. No unions were operating in any of the hotels in the study, so union membership was not questioned. Global interview techniques such as back translation, dual listeners, translator presence, random sampling and multifaceted questions were used to reduce interviewer bias and ethnocentrism, as well as recency and halo effects from the participants.We chose to modify existing job satisfaction survey instruments to conduct the interviews based on methodological concerns documented in the literature (Hwang and Chi 2005). Many of he previous instruments were constructed in a questionnaire format, which could limit the richness of the information captured. Face-to-face interviews allow for cultural cues to surface during the data collection process. Therefore, we integrated the elements from existing instruments deemed most useful to this study into a personal interview format. For instance, Hackman and Oldham’s (1980)Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) includes employee motivation, job satisfaction levels, and employee growth and development, all desired job outcomes. The JDS links these items to many of Herzberg’s (1966) factors, including task significance, autonomy, feedback, managerial relations, coworkers, meaningfulness of work, responsibility and appropriate training for the job. However, it does not incorporate the cultural aspects of work, which we felt were important.While the Job Description Index (JDI) of Smith, Kendall and Hulin (1969) is one of the most commonly used scales, it was deemed somewhat inappropriate because we focus on the services sector and JDI is better suited to manufacturing environments (Hwang and Chi 2005). Spector’s (1985) Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) offers more application to the service industry but with a limited focus on culture. Our interview questions, accordingly, incorporate elements from the three instrumentsin order to address issues relevant to hospitality industry workers and to consider cultural factors. We include 13 factors, whereas JDS incorporates four factors, JDI incorporates five factors and JSS incorporates ten factors. Sample guidelines from the observation protocol and sample interview questions can be found in Box 1. Translators were present during each interview to ensure that respondents fully understood the questions.Data analysisRespondent data gathered during the observations and interviews were analysed by using a comparative case method as suggested by Ragin (1994). Here, individual respondents were deemed to be separate cases for evaluation purposes. Based on the Two-Factor theoretical framework, key variables were identified from each case write up. Respondents’ key factors were identified and coded (Miles and Domke-Damonte 2000; Zhangand Rajagopalan 2002) using motivation theory and satisfaction theory frameworks.The Brazilian sample indicated that some of the hygiene factors did promote dissatisfaction,as expected. These primarily included the areas of salary,security, and policy and administration. Other hygiene factors, such as supervision, working conditions, relationships with coworkers and status did not elicit overwhelming dissatisfaction among the employees. These results support the findings of Garibaldi de Hilal (2006), who noted that ambiguity, hierarchy and relational networks permeate Brazilian hotel organizational culture. It may be that these workplace factors are important in service industries and in South American organizations. For instance, the observed discomfort associated with queries regarding the degree of satisfaction may explain this finding and may be indicative of cultural mores. Perhaps it is not acceptable to exhibit dissatisfaction with work given the high reverence of service. Or perhaps, holding a job is so valued that one dare not display dissatisfaction with work. Given the observed presence of teamwork and employee loyalty, possibly commitment is the more pertinent precursor to employee performance than job satisfaction in the environment assessed. These findings merit further study in this area.对巴西酒店员工满意度的研究调查通常，在巴西的研究主要集中在行业发展趋势和（布朗1995;史密斯2003年）的经济问题。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
外文翻译译文标题：黎巴嫩银行职员工作满意度和员工的绩效资料来源: 管理心理学杂志作者：阿尔夫克罗斯曼介绍：工作满意度是一个标准建立健全的组织；提供有效的服务很大程度上取决于人类源（菲茨杰拉德等人，1994年）和有经验的雇员的工作满意度会影响他们呈现的服务质量。
其他变量的效率，如基础设施和内部关系的影响也应予以确认。
工作满意度已定义为积极的情绪状态，引起来自（洛克，1976 ；这项工作的工人的乐趣斯佩克特，1997年）以及有关各方面的工作（Kalleberg，1977 ；雇员的情感和认知态度默瑟，1997 年；赖特和 Cropanzano，1997 年；黄等人，1998年）；后来的暗示，满意被有关组件方面，而不是整个的工作，与斯佩克特的 (1997) 的观点是一致的。
研究目的是扩大银行业研究议程一般和黎巴嫩特别。
时在中东的工作满意度的有限的研究重点是主要与性别有关，并限于科威特（Metle，1997 年，2001年），或向领导和承诺，在阿拉伯联合酋长国（优素福，2000年）。
从九个商业银行在黎巴嫩依靠 202 雇员的样本，这项研究的结果表明工作满意度不是独立的所有工作方面，和那满意的一个方面可能会导致另一个满意。
工作满意度理论情境理论假设变量如任务特征、组织化特征和个性特征的相互作用影响工作满意度（雷克和 Miskel，1996年）。
个人计算就业（Quarstein 等人，1992年），生效日期前的情景的特性，而事后评估情景出现的。
根据 toQuarstein et al.(1992 年)，总体满意度是组合的情境特征和情景出现的函数。
情境特征通常建议工作满意度的关键因素是：工作本身，薪酬、促进、监督和同事（史密斯等人，1969年)，虽然其他变量，如员工的参与和组织承诺还可能会影响。
已有大量的研究工作满意，探讨人口的特征，如年龄、性别、任期内和教育 (克拉克，1993 年的影响克拉克和奥斯瓦尔德，1995 年；紧致和 Oshagbemi，1999 年；Oshagbemi，1998 年，2000a，b）。
结果表明存在的人口特征与工作满意度，之间的关系，但证据往往掺正面和负面的关系，有时为同一变量之间的互动关系确定。
工作满意度与绩效之间的关系是商榷；它是不明智的承担导致高性能、高的工作满意度或高的表演者都满意自己的工作（Euske 等人，1980年）。
大量的研究表明一个薄弱环节（小额等人，1984 ；Iaffaldano 和 Muchinsky，1985年）而其他（考德威尔和奥赖利，1990 年；斯佩克特，1997年）建议满意度与绩效之间的潜在关系。
目前尚不清楚的原因及影响的因素，并不能想当然地认为满意导致高性能，或高效的执行者一定满意自己的工作（Euske 等人，1980年）。
研究的背景银行业在黎巴嫩被认为是该国国内生产总值的重要来源，并报告净利润 5.134 亿黎巴嫩里拉，是重要的收入发电机（银行公会在黎巴嫩，2000年）。
2000 年 9 月有 64 商业银行在黎巴嫩工作、 33 个黎巴嫩人和九名外商独资。
1999 年底银行的雇员人数是 15,152，在黎巴嫩 (银行公会在黎巴嫩，2000年）的总就业人数约占1%。
方法目标人群是 33 黎巴嫩商业私人银行、首都和北部和南部地区，（银行公会在黎巴嫩，2000年） 1999年-2000 年年度报告来自非管理人员。
33 银行，11 入选第分层随机抽样，按区域正在取得大致相称的反应。
通过问卷调查收集资料。
第一个有关工作满意度，基于对作业描述性索引 (JDI) （史密斯等人，1969年)，随时间（Kinicki 等人，2002 年）的可靠方面措施，适用于不同的人口群体（Golembiewski 和 Yeager，1978 ；荣等人，1986年）和可靠的翻译成阿拉伯文（Mughrabi 和约翰逊，1995年）时。
该文书 JDI 对被限制为五个方面备受批评，特定的项目可能不适用于所有雇员组（巴法姆和薛尼克，1982年），延长了其他两个方面：附带福利和工作条件，是衡量 7 点规模与不满 (1) 到非常满意（7）的锚点。
在表中显示加权的原始的五个方面我。
部分两包含四个自我评价有关问题答辩人的性能和效率，以及自己与他们的同事相比的性能。
优素福（2000 年），已经成功地使用在中东的文化从通过了问题。
使用巴鲁克的答复衡量 (1996 年，第 65) 7 点规模，因为它似乎孔比优素福的 7 点("非常高"到"非常低") 的目标：•上升5%；•上升10%；•上升20%；•上升30%；•上升40%；•上升50%；•降低50%。
第三个包含的社会人口有关问题特征如年龄、性别、婚姻状况、教育、等级和长度的服务。
与从贝鲁特，在接受调查的银行之一的十个非管理人员进行的一项试点研究表示变化的反应不是很高。
试验数据的分析产生的均值的 147.56 和 SD 30.51 的估计。
共有 202 受访者研究，其中 66.8%是女性。
约 37.6%的受访者持有学士学位和18.8%拥有硕士学位。
超过一半 (53.5%) 的受访者是在 25 至 34 岁范围内，与 5%是 44 岁及以上。
大多数 (58.4%) 曾少于五年中他们现时的银行，虽然只占 4.5%有 21 年以上的服务。
由采取的相应的项目的平均建造工作满意度（工作、薪酬、促进、监督和同事) 五项新措施。
这五个维度的平均然后构建整体工作满意度测量。
整体工作绩效建成所采取的相应的四个项目的平均。
使用 Cronbach 的 alpha，得分的满意度为 0.90 和自我表现正在生成表㈢0.81 测试内部可靠性的项目调查结果显示被访者最满意的同事 (M = 2.25) 和质量监督 (M = 2.24），但不那么满意工作本身 (M = 1.80），促进 (M = 1.44) 和支付 (M = 1.08)。
工作满意度总分是 M = 177)。
各方面之间的关系被发现意义重大，指示受访者的工作满意度不相关的各个方面。
数据还受到弗里德曼的非参数测试。
平均每个小平面排名是同事，先生 = 3.99 ；监督，先生 = 3.95 ；工作本身，先生 = 2.94 ；推广，先生 = 2.41 ；和薪酬，先生 = 1.71。
在 0.05 一级的意义（我没有 0.0001) 表明满意程度并不是独立的个人工作方面。
至于工作满意度和社会人口特征；之间的关系单向的方差分析的结果表明总体工作满意度略有关雇员的年龄，但在 0.05 级别不是统计学 (p = 0.58)。
当个人工作满意度方面和年龄，平均工作满意度的各个层面的分数策划针对不同年龄组，结果显示年龄和工作满意度的弱关系。
结果显示小的变化，整体工作满意度与受访者的任期内，但此后整体工作的满意程度是最低为 11 至 20 年使用权和它的工人稍有增加。
单向的方差分析的结果显示总体工作满意度是稍有相关的任期内，但无统计学0.05 一级 (p = 0.25)。
进一步分析表明少于五年任期的受访者非常满意同事和后跟工作本身的监督。
那些具有不少于五年最不满意薪酬和晋升。
两个性别群体不正常分布，Mann-惠特尼 U 测试进行了测试每个层面的性别和工作满意度之间的关系。
女性的薪酬明显高于满意度和监督男性较满意。
结果显示，男性比女性的工作本身方面，促进和同事，更满意，但这些都不是统计学。
总体工作满意度与教育之间的关系是单向的方差分析的方法进行测试。
虽然结果表明了一种关系，但不是统计学意义 (p = 0.094）。
受访的总体工作满意度最低水平与学校证书和最高的工作满意度宗从那些大学证书。
虽然结果表明一些差异在不同方面的满意度在这些不是统计学的。
第三个领域是调查的工作满意度与工作绩效之间的关系。
每年的四大措施的自我报告的得分在 7 点规模高边。
得分最高的生产效率是 (M = 4.65）、联合跟着自己的同事和自己的性能质量相比的性能（M = 4.60)。
受访机构评级的他们同事的性能吸引了最低分数 (M = 4.19)。
4.51 整体性能平均值。
然而，这些结果可能出现偏态自我评价的膨胀与自我评价的方法是与同事性能根据评级。
数据的进一步分析显示，高二年级性能相关年龄；每年的四个性能的措施，与整体，分数较高比 25–34 集团在 < 25 年。
分数是低 35-44 岁组中与 > 44 年组中的高得多。
任期与平均工作绩效之间的关系而言，结果表明高二年级性能线性随着保有权；唯一的例外是线性增加达 11-20 年组，然后下降 > 21 岁组的被访者自己表现评分。
在各个方面的工作表现比女性高出男性的自我的表现。
斯皮尔曼秩相关测试的结果表明，有没有重大工作满意度与工作绩效的关系（r = −0.01，p = 0.90）。
讨论和结论女员工发现明显有更多满意薪酬比男性，这似乎证实了斯佩克特 (1997 年) 的论据妇女期待更低的工作，因此它们不满意。
另一方面，男性员工显著更满意监督女同行，可能是因为他们重视更多的机会自我表达和影响重要的决定。
工作人员很少受过良好教育，主要是那些有资格学校证书、最不满意的工作；这违背了克拉克(1993 年) 和克拉克和奥斯瓦尔德（1995 年）、紧致和 Oshagbemi（1999 年）、 Metle （2001 年）和 Oshagbemi b 2000a）的结果。
可能的解释是这些员工没有所需的技能，以应付银行业不断变化的性质或管理处理他们少毫不逊色。
整体上的被访者满意自己的工作。
带薪的性别和工作满意度和监督；之间有重大关系女员工发现更满意薪酬比男性，而男性也更满意监督。
至于工作满意度与绩效；之间的关系调查结果显示没有重大的关系，这似乎印证了结果的小资东北师范大学（1984 年），以及 Iaffaldano 和 Muchinsky （1985 年）。
或许正如斯佩克特（1997 年）表明，潜力，而不是一个容易辨认的现实。
请务必记住的工作满意度得分源自 JDI 调查表，增强，虽然有限的范围内。
但是，如果使用另一个性能评价方法的范围有所扩大，可标识满意度与绩效之间的关系。
虽然这项研究有助于有限知识对工作满意度在中东地区的身体，还有，当然，许多的限制。
首先，数据收集得来的自行调查问卷，著名的不足之处，一种方法，结果的有效性可能成问题。
第二，性能度量值基于自我评价和可能造成的表现评分8。
第三，该示例是相对较小，局限于一个国家的银行部门。
因此，结果可能不普及到其他部门或其他民族和文化背景。
为了克服这些限制，建议进一步研究调查工作满意度和员工绩效，使用替代性能的措施之间的联系绘图上更加多样化的示例，并探讨了相关性，如果有）的民族文化。
外文文献原文Title: Job satisfaction and employee performance of Lebanese banking staffMaterial Source: Journal of Managerial Psychology Author: Alf Crossman IntroductionJob satisfaction is one criterion for establishing the health of an organisation; rendering effective services largely depends on the human source (Fitzgerald et al., 1994) and job satisfaction experienced by employees will affect the quality of service they render. The impact of other variables on efficiency, such as infrastructures and internal relationships, should also be recognised. Job satisfaction has been defined as a positive emotional state resulting from the pleasure a worker derives from the job (Locke, 1976; Spector, 1997) and as the affective and cognitive attitudes held by an employee about various aspects of their work (Kalleberg, 1977; Mercer, 1997; Wright and Cropanzano, 1997; Wong et al., 1998); the later implying that satisfaction is related to the component facets rather than the whole job, which is consistent with Spector's (1997) view.The research aim was to broaden the research agenda to the banking sector in general and to the Lebanon in particular. While there is limited research into job satisfaction in the Middle-East the focus is principally concerned with gender and limited to Kuwait (Metle, 1997, 2001), or to leadership and commitment in the United Arab Emirates (Yousef, 2000). Drawing on a sample of 202 employees from nine commercial banks in the Lebanon, the results of this research indicate that job satisfaction is not independent in all job facets and that satisfaction with one facet might lead to satisfaction with another.Job satisfaction theorySituational theories assume that the interaction of variables such as task characteristics, organisational characteristics and individual characteristics influences job satisfaction (Hoy and Miskel, 1996). The individual evaluates the situational characteristics before commencement of employment (Quarstein et al., 1992), whereas situational occurrences are evaluated afterwards. According toQuarstein et al. (1992),overall satisfaction is a function of a combination of situational characteristics and situational occurrences. The situational characteristics commonly proposed as key factors in job satisfaction are: the work itself, pay, promotion, supervision and co-workers (Smith et al., 1969), although other variables such as employee involvement and organisational commitment may impact also.There have been numerous studies into job satisfaction which explore the impact of demographic characteristics such as age, gender, tenure, and education (Clark, 1993; Clark and Oswald, 1995; Hickson and Oshagbemi, 1999; Oshagbemi, 1998, 2000a, b). The results suggest the existence of relationships between demographic characteristics and job satisfaction, but the evidence tends to be mixed, with positive and negative relationships sometimes identified for the interactions between same variables.The relationship between job satisfaction and performance is still open to question; it would be unwise to assume that high job satisfaction leads to high performance, or that high performers are satisfied with their jobs (Euske et al., 1980). A number of studies indicate a weak link (Petty et al., 1984; Iaffaldano and Muchinsky, 1985) while others (Caldwell and O'Reilly, 1990; Spector, 1997) suggest a potential relationship between satisfaction and performance. The cause and effect determinants are still unclear and it cannot be assumed that satisfaction leads to high performance, or that high performers are necessarily satisfied with their jobs (Euske et al., 1980).Background to the researchThe banking industry in Lebanon is considered to be an important source of the country's gross domestic product and, with reported net profits of 513.4 billion Lebanese Lira, it is a significant income-generator (Association of Banks in Lebanon, 2000). By September 2000 there were 64 commercial banks working in the Lebanon, 33 were Lebanese and nine foreign-owned. By the end of 1999 the number of banking employees was 15,152, approximately 1 per cent of the total employment in the Lebanon (Association of Banks in Lebanon, 2000).MethodThe target population was the non-managerial staff in the 33 Lebanese commercial private banks, in the capital and the north and south regions, drawn from the AnnualReport for 1999-2000 (Association of Banks in Lebanon, 2000). Of the 33 banks, 11 were selected by stratified random sampling by region with a roughly proportionate response being achieved.The data were collected by questionnaire. Section one concerned job satisfaction and was based on the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) (Smith et al., 1969), a reliable facet measure over time (Kinicki et al., 2002), applicable across a variety of demographic groups (Golembiewski and Yeager, 1978; Jung et al., 1986) and reliable when translated into Arabic (Mughrabi and Johnson, 1995). As the JDI has been criticised for being limited to five facets and that particular items might not apply to all employee groups (Buffum and Konick, 1982), the instrument was extended by two additional facets: fringe benefits and working conditions, which were measured on a seven-point scale with dissatisfied (1) to very satisfied (7) anchors. The original five facets weighting is displayed in Table I.Section two contained four self-evaluation questions regarding the respondent's own performance and productivity, as well as their own performance compared with their colleagues. The questions were adopted from Yousef (2000), which had been used successfully in a Middle-Eastern culture. The responses were measured using Baruch's (1996, p. 65) seven-point scale, as it appeared to bore objective than Yousef's own seven-point (“very high” to “very low”) scale:•the upper 5 per cent;•the upper 10 per cent;•the upper 20 per cent;•the upper 30 per cent;•the upper 40 per cent;•the upper 50 per cent;•the lower 50 per cent.Section three contained socio-demographic questions related to characteristics such as age, gender, marital status, education, rank and length of service.A pilot study, conducted with ten non-managerial employees from one of the banks surveyed in Beirut, indicated that the variation of response was not very high. Analysis of the pilot study data produced an estimate of the population mean of 147.56 and a SD of30.51.There were 202 respondents in the study (Table II), of which 66.8 per cent were female. Around 37.6 per cent of the respondents hold a bachelor degree and 18.8 per cent hold a masters degree. More than half (53.5 per cent) of the respondents were in the 25 to 34 age range, and 5 per cent were aged 44 and above. The majority (58.4 per cent) had worked for less than five years in their present bank, while only 4.5 per cent had more than 21 years of service.Five new measures of job satisfaction (work, pay, promotion, supervision and co-workers) were constructed by taking the mean of the respective items. The overall job satisfaction measure was then constructed from the mean of these five dimensions. Overall job performance was constructed by taking the mean of the four respective items. ResultsOf the 370 questionnaires distributed, 202 (usable) were returned, a response rate of 55 per cent. The internal reliability of the items was tested using Cronbach's alpha, with scores of 0.90 for satisfaction and 0.81 for self performance being generated (Table III).The results show that respondents were most satisfied with co-workers (M=2.25) and quality of supervision (M=2.24), but less satisfied with the work itself (M=1.80), promotion (M=1.44) and pay (M=1.08). The overall job satisfaction score was M=1.77). The relationship between all the facets was found to be significant, indicating the respondents’ job satisfaction is not related to an individual facet. The data were also subjected to a non-parametric Friedman test. The mean ranks for each facet were co-workers, MR=3.99; supervision, MR=3.95; work itself, MR=2.94; promotion, MR=2.41; and pay, MR=1.71. The significance (sig. 0.0001) at the 0.05 level suggests the satisfaction was not independent in the individual job facets.As far as the relationship between job satisfaction and socio-demographic characteristics; the results of a one-way ANOV A indicate that overall job satisfaction is slightly related to the age of the employee, but is not statistically significant at the 0.05 level (p=0.58). When the individual job satisfaction facets and age, the mean job satisfaction score in each facet was plotted against the different age groups, the results indicate a weak relationship between age and facets of job satisfaction. The results showlittle variation between overall job satisfaction and respondents’ tenure, but that overall job satisfaction level is lowest for workers with 11 to 20 years tenure and it slightly increases thereafter.The results of a one-way ANOV A show that overall job satisfaction is slightly related to tenure, but not statistically significant at the 0.05 level (p=0.25). Further analysis indicates that respondents with less than five years tenure are highly satisfied with co-workers and supervision followed by the work itself. Those with less than five years are least satisfied with pay and promotion.As the two gender groups were not normally distributed, a Mann-Whitney U test was performed to test the relationship between gender and job satisfaction with each facet. The results (Table IV) indicate significantly higher satisfaction among females for pay and significantly higher satisfaction among males for supervision. The results indicate that males are more satisfied than females with the facets of the work itself, promotion and co-workers, but these are not statistically significant.The relationship between overall job satisfaction and education was tested by way of a one-way ANOV A. Although the results indicated a relationship, it is not statistically significant (p=0.094). Respondents with a school certificate reported the lowest levels of overall job satisfaction and the highest job satisfaction levels were reported from those with a college certificate. While the results indicate some differences in satisfaction with the different facets these are not statistically significant.The third area of investigation was the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance. The self-reported scores for each of the four measures were on the higher side of the seven-point scale. The highest score was for productivity (M=4.65), followed jointly by own performance compared to colleagues and quality of own performance (M=4.60). The respondents’ rating of their colleagues’ performance attracted the lowest score (M=4.19). The overall performance mean was 4.51. However, these results may be skewed by the self-evaluation method with self-ratings are being inflated and colleagues performance under-rated.Further analysis of the data revealed that self-reported performance is related to age; in each of the four performance measures, and overall, the score was higher in the 25–34group than in the < 25 years. The score was lower in the 35-44 years group and considerably higher in the > 44 years group. As far as the relationship between tenure and mean job performance is concerned, the results show that self-reported performance increases linearly with tenure; the only exception being the respondents own performance rating which increases linearly up to the 11-20 years group then declines for the > 21 years group. The self-reported performance of males is higher in all facets of job performance than that of females. The results of the Spearman rank order correlation test indicate there is no sig nificant relationship between job satisfaction and job performance (r=−0.01, p=0.90).Discussion and conclusionsFemale employees were found to be significantly more satisfied with pay than their male counterparts, this seems to confirm the argument by Spector (1997) that women expect less from work and so they are satisfied with less. On the other hand, male employees are significantly more satisfied with supervision than their female counterparts, possibly because they value more the opportunities for self-expression and to influence important decisions.Less well-educated staff, mainly those qualified to school certificate, were least satisfied with jobs; this contradicts the findings of Clark (1993) and Clark and Oswald (1995), Hickson and Oshagbemi (1999), Metle (2001) and Oshagbemi (2000a, b). Possible explanations are that these employees do not have the necessary skills to cope with the changing nature of the banking industry or that management treats them less favourably.On the whole the respondents were satisfied with their jobs. There was a significant relationship between gender and job satisfaction with pay and supervision; female employees were found to be more satisfied with pay than their male counterparts, whereas, males were more satisfied with supervision.As for the relationship between job satisfaction and performance; the results show no significant relationship, this seems to bear out the findings of Petty et al. (1984) as well as those of Iaffaldano and Muchinsky (1985). Perhaps it is, as Spector (1997) suggests, a potential rather than an easily identifiable reality. It is important to remember that the job satisfaction score was derived from the JDI questionnaire which, although augmented, islimited in scope. However, if the scope was broadened and another performance appraisal method used, a relationship between satisfaction and performance may be identified.While this research contributes to the limited body of knowledge on job satisfaction in the Middle-East, there are, of course, a number of limitations. First, the data were collected by self-administered questionnaire, a method with well-known shortcomings, and the validity of the results may be questionable. Second, the performance measure was based on self-evaluation and may have caused over-rating of performance scores. Third, the sample is relatively small and restricted to the banking sector in one country. Consequently the findings may not be generalised to other sectors or to other national and cultural contexts. In order to overcome these limitations further research is recommended to investigate link between job satisfaction and employee performance, using alternative performance measures, drawing on a more diverse sample and which explores the relevance, if any, of national culture.。