Factors Affecting Employee Performance: A Case Study of Railway Maintenance and Engineering Organizations in Thailand

Abstract

The objectives of the research are to study the effects of emotional intelligence (EI), reward management (RM), and occupational health and safety (OHS), on employee performance (EP) within a Thai motor service and repair firm. Starting in January 2022 through the end of March 2022, the researchers used simple random sampling techniques to select 88 employees for the case study. The research instrument was a questionnaire with an IOC value between 0.67-1.00 and a reliability value α of 0.78. Survey participants were asked to contribute their opinions to a five-level opinion survey which was hosted on Google Forms. Descriptive statistics analysis (mean and standard deviation) and multiple linear regression analysis were done using SPSS for Windows version 21. The results showed that employee opinions concerning EI, RM, OHS, and EP were at a high level, with the three hypotheses testing showing statistical significance (p ≤ 0.01). The decision coefficients (R²) all revealed relationship strength with RM = 0.861, OHS = 0.853, and EI = 0.731.

1. Introduction

In corporate management, the term ‘performance’ is often referred to as a demonstration of the importance of effective organizational management to build and achieve a firm’s goals and a competitive edge (Moradi et al., 2021). Along with the COVID-19 pandemic came a total upheaval of every aspect of life, from the personal to the professional. This includes how individuals work and live how organizations interact with their customers, how customers choose and purchase products and services, and how supply chains deliver (or do not deliver) them (Am et al., 2020). Therefore, employee performance in these processes can make or break a firm or even a nation’s economy. Put another way, companies can often live or die on the quality of their workforces (Frei, 2008).

The performance also becomes a vital part of the existence and growth of the company which helps with a firm’s capacity and competence building. As competition increases, firms must also use employee performance tools and processes to build strengths, eliminate weaknesses, and adapt to a changing environment. As such, firms must institute performance accountability in which organizational capability is translated as employees realizing that failure to meet goals is an unacceptable option (Ulrich & Smallwood, 2004).

Another aspect that is critical to employee management is the level of emotional intelligence (EI) that an individual brings to their job and their organization. According to Rexhepi and Berisha (2017), successful change management depends on how little or how much EI an individual has. In Indonesia, Edward and Purba (2020) determined that EI as well as the work environment had a strong positive influence on EP through organizational commitment in an electrical generation firm.

Another key aspect of EP is how well a firm’s HRM professionals manage the firm’s employee reward system with numerous studies pointing to the positive nature of this relationship across multiple sectors and research methods including shipping (Mira et al., 2019), hospitality (Hewagama et al., 2019), power generation (Edward & Purba, 2020), and multiple meta-analysis studies (Jiang et al., 2013; Meijerink et al., 2021; Paauwe & Blok, 2015),

Furthermore, numerous studies have examined how the work environment and its related occupational health and safety (OHS) affect EP. Support for the critical importance of these relationships can be found in data from the International Labour Organization (ILO) which states that over 7.600 workers die in work accidents or related diseases every day (Purwanto, 2020). To address these problems, multiple international programs have been initiated (Fonseca & Carvalho, 2019).

Furthermore, it is well known that the organization and its employees are complementary, so to make the organization successful, in addition to the management method of reducing costs and expenses, it is necessary to rely on its human resources. Quality human resources in the organization is a critical force as they are involved with every aspect of the organization, including finance, strategic management, procurement, HRM, information communication technology (ICT), and customer service (Srikan et al., 2021). In addition, staff members must have knowledge and ability, a good awareness, the right ideas, a positive attitude towards the organization, and be willing to work according to their roles and responsibilities. Specifically, employees must act and comply with the company’s rules and regulations, take responsibility for their assigned duties, participate in sharing opinions, be able to resolve problems and obstacles, have good judgment in making decisions, be a sponsor and take part in activities that increase productivity and increase the quality of products and services.

Coming out of the chaos of the COVID-19 global pandemic, Thailand is currently gearing up its manufacturing sector. It is also increasing investment in its infrastructure, which includes everything from robotics technology for industries such as electrical vehicles to high-speed trains. Therefore, educational leaders and their institutions must prepare today’s students to be tomorrow’s digitally enabled knowledge workers with the ability and ambition to undertake lifelong learning and innovative thinking (Anuntarumporn & Sornsaruht, 2022; Phurikultong & Kantathanawat, 2022; Srikan et al., 2021).

Therefore, with the authors seeing the critical importance of these aspects on a firm’s employee performance, the researchers were invited to undertake a case study within a Thai firm involved in the engineering, repair, and servicing of electrical motors used in Thailand’s national railroads and light rail systems such as Thailand’s BTS and MRT, as well as many other forms of electrical machines and equipment. Since the firm’s inception, it has grown rapidly with an ever-increasing customer base, workshop base, and a number of employees.

However, growth is seldom easy and as with the firm, the inability to respond in a timely manner to customer needs creates a loss of productivity for the client customer. Therefore, there must always be a team of skilled technicians on-call to effectively and quickly take care of critical maintenance issues. Thus, it is expected that the company’s HRM effectively allocates and manages its personnel.

More importantly, HRM staff and ICT must be able to arrange personnel to suit his/her skills and interests will allow personnel to be satisfied both at the workplace and on the company’s customer site. If managed properly, the resultant outcome is an efficient organization where costs are reduced, staffs are happy, and profit is achieved. Therefore, HRM plays a critical role in production performance and product quality standards.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Emotional Intelligence (EI)

Emotional intelligence (EI) was first proposed by Salovey and Mayer (1990), in which authors explained that EI was the ability to monitor one’s own and other’s emotions and feelings. With this ability, good EI then could be used to discriminate how this information was used to guide an individual’s own thinking and actions. Furthermore, the authors stated that EI contained a combination of four groups of emotion-related competencies (Capability Model), which include basic to complex skills (Bitmiş & Ergeneli, 2014; Doan et al., 2020; Wong & Law, 2002; Yang et al., 2015). In another model, now referred to as the ‘Mixed Intelligence Model’ proposed by Goleman and Bar-On, the authors described EI as an individual’s personality characteristics and mental ability which includes optimism, well-being, and adaptability (Dhani & Sharma, 2016).

Other studies have also stated the importance of EI on EP. In Indonesia Noermijati et al. (2019) determined that EI has a strong influence on compromising styles, integrating styles, and EP amongst civil servants. In Romania, a study on the importance of EI to HRM professionals revealed that EI was a good predictor of workplace performance, positive work attitudes, stress resistance, and career achievements (Sabie et al., 2020). Thus, a high EI can affect all management aspects (Purnama, 2017).

2.2. Reward Management (RM)

One of the greatest challenges facing today’s human resource management (HRM) departments is what type of employee rewards are appropriate and in the best interest of both the firm and the employee. Also, although there is no consistent definition of what ‘employee rewards’ consist of, there is consistency in their importance. Thus, according to Shoaib et al. (2009), HRM‘s reward management (RM) signals to employees that are appreciated by their organization. Armstrong and Taylor (2014) later added that RM involved dealing with the policies, strategies, and processes that are necessary to safeguard the staff’s value and the contribution they make to achieving organizational, departmental, and team goals. Bratton and Gold (2001) added that RM is a central pillar in HRM and central to the regulation of employment relationships.

Specifically, one example of reward importance comes from a Singaporean study in which Jadhav et al. (2017) stated that recognition and rewards played an essential role in energizing employees to demonstrate innovative work behavior. Another study concerning Indonesian banking determined that a bank’s extrinsic and intrinsic reward systems had a significant and direct effect on organizational commitment and job performance (Taba, 2018).

Moreover, employee rewards are an integral part of the strategy and policy-setting process of an organization. To create an efficient and fair reward system, an operational design is required, which must be continually improved. Additionally, an HRM-implemented reward process must focus on improving individual, group, and organizational behavior (Armstrong & Stephens, 2005). RM also creates a strategic alliance within the organization, as rewards can be used for relationships between employees and employers as well as tools for guiding employees to act and work more effectively (White & Drucker, 2000; Stredwick, 2005).

2.3. Occupational Health and Safety (OHS)

Occupational health and safety is an area concerned with the development, promotion, and maintenance of the workplace environment, as well as the policies and programs that ensure the mental, physical, and emotional well-being of employees. Good OHS programs are also involved with keeping the workplace environment relatively free from actual or potential hazards that could potentially injure employees or visitors (Nyirendaavwil et al., 2015).

In Indonesia, Purnama (2017) investigated how both EI and OHS influenced EP and suggested that EI and OHS simultaneously affected employee performance. Therefore, organizations needed to provide additional training on how to use self-development to improve EP and build productivity. Moreover, in Nigeria, Ikechukwu et al. (2019) found that when an organization’s work environment is conducive to the work being performed, it increases EP as well as the firm’s productivity, allowing management to achieve their goals.

2.4. Employee Performance (EP)

Most employees would probably be able to identify which aspects are considered beneficial to EP, but how many could list the aspects considered negative to EP? To answer this question, research from Indonesia identified a long list of negative aspects concerning EP. These included a decline in work discipline as a primary factor which had secondary factors including being late for work, exceeding the break time limits, leaving work early, not wearing the appropriate uniforms/clothing, not carrying out individual duties and responsibilities, and finally, not competing for work in a timely manner (Hermina & Yosepha, 2019). Therefore, one can assume that doing all these things correctly contributes to a good EP.

This is consistent with Yang et al. (2016) research concerning China’s banking sector, from which the authors simply stated that EP is what actions employees take or don’t take. Similarly, Shmailan (2016) stated that EP relates to employee actions while they work. Therefore, performance and rewards should be dependent on an individual’s skills, abilities, and traits.

2.5. Hypotheses

H1: Emotional Intelligence (EI) influences Employee Performance (EP).

H2: Reward Management (RM) influences Employee Performance (EP).

H3: Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) influences Employee Performance (EP).

2.6. Research Framework

This research study’s framework was partially determined by previous EP research from Peterson et al. (1962) (Figure 1). A later study from Kriangsrisakul and Tresirichod (2021) in Thailand further expanded the EP factors and their use with occupational stress and demographic factors. In Indonesia, Purnama (2017) also examined EI and occupational health influences on EP.

Figure 1: Factors Affecting EP

3. Research Methods

The study intended to develop a path analysis of factors affecting a Thai engineering and motor service and repair company’s employee performance. In the company, a questionnaire was employed as the research instrument, which was analyzed with SPSS for Windows version 21 and Multiple Regression Analysis (MRA) (Askarov & Doucouliagos, 2020; Hermina & Yosepha, 2019).

3.1. Population and Sample

The population for the study consisted of 112 employees in the Asia Engineering & Service (Thailand) Co. Ltd. in Bangkok, Thailand. The sample size requirement was calculated using the Slovin/Yamane formula using a confidence level of 95% (Ryan, 2013). From this, a sample size of 88 was determined to be sufficient for the research (Edward & Purba, 2020; Purnama, 2017; Singh & Masuku, 2014). Proportionate random sampling was used from January 2022 through the end of March 2022 to select each individual at the target company until 88 had agreed to participate.

Slovin/Yamane’s formula: n = N / (1 + Ne²)       (1)

Where n = number of samples, N = total population and e = error tolerance level.

3.2. Research Instruments

The researcher used a closed-ended questionnaire tool for data collection which was divided into five parts. Part 1 contained items concerning each employee’s personal and professional factors (Table 1). In Parts 2–5 a five-level Likert-type opinion scale was used to assess each employee’s opinion (Table 2). The scale levels and values were ‘5’ representing the most agreement which has a mean value of 4.51 to 5.00. A level 4 response indicated somewhat agree with a mean value of 3.51 to 4.50. A level 2 response indicated somewhat disagree with a mean value of 1.51 to 2.50. Finally, a level 1 response indicated no agreement with a mean value of 1.00 to 1.50.

Table 1: Employee Demographics and Work-Related Information

Table 2: Mean and SD for EI, RM, OHS, and EP

3.3. Research Instrument Tryout, Validity and Reliability

After the questionnaire’s development, three academic experts reviewed each item proposed by the researchers to assess the questionnaire’s content validity (Chuenban et al., 2021; Taherdoost, 2016). Various studies have suggested that the index of item-objective congruency (IOC) is a good analysis tool for this purpose (Turner & Carlson, 2003). As such, IOC scoring uses +1 to indicate the item is consistent with the research objectives or definitions, –1 to indicate inconsistency, and 0 to indicate there is a question concerning the item wording. Usually, items with values of ≤ 0.50 are deleted or revised (Taherdoost, 2016). After this process, the authors were pleased to determine that the final questionnaire had IOC values of 0.67–1.00.

Next, the reliability assessment confirmed the survey instrument’s usability, accuracy, and reliability. To achieve this, a try-out was undertaken using 30 individuals not participating in the final survey, where Cronbach’s α numerical values were given to each item. The study’s try-out returned an Alpha (α) average value of 0.78.

3.4. Data Collection

Data and data sources used in the study consisted of two parts, including primary and secondary data. Primary data was the data collected by the questionnaires from the motor service company employees. The secondary data was obtained by studying the relevant information from multiple sources, including journals, research reports, and Internet resources.

3.5. Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics including the percent, mean, and standard deviation (SD) were used for the analysis of the 88 employee questionnaires obtained. Statistical inference using Multiple Linear Regression Analysis (MLRA) was used calculated by using SPSS for Windows.

4. Results

4.1. Employee Response Information

Table 1 shows results from Part 1 of the questionnaire, in which 53.4% of the respondents were men. Surprisingly, the workforce was relatively young, with 48.90% 25 to 35 years of age. This was followed by 30.70% being 36 to 45 years old. Respondent levels of education were highly divergent, with 43.20% indicating they had obtained a secondary school year 6/vocational level certificate. Another 30.70% had indicated they had finished Secondary School Year 3, while 15.90% indicated they had only an elementary school education or less. Moreover, 40.90% indicated their position title was ‘Field service technician’, while another 35.20% indicated they were a ‘mechanic’. Concerning monthly salaries, 80.7% indicated their monthly salary range was from 20,001 to 30,000 Baht ($571 to $856) to 30,001 to 40,000 Baht ($856to $1,142). Finally, most had 6–10 years of work experience (38.60%), followed by 1–5 years (30.70%), and 11–15 years of work experience (18.20%).

4.2. Mean and Standard Deviation Analysis Results

Table 2 details the mean and standard deviation (SD) analysis for each questionnaire item.

4.3. Regression Results

H1: Emotional Intelligence (EI) influences Employee Performance (EP).

In Table 3, the decision coefficient (R²) is 0.731 which indicates that 73.1% of EI’s factors are responsible for EP, while 26.9% are due to other influences. The test also found that social skill (x³) (p-value ≤ 0.01) had the greatest influence on EP, followed by motivation (x²) (p-value ≤ 0.01). The coefficients of the variables in the standard score form (Beta) were x³ = 0.385, x² = 0.364, and x¹ = 0.287, respectively. The results of EI for Thai motor service and repair companies’ EP from the standard scores are as follows:

Z = 0.385x³ + 0.364x² + 0.287x⁵       (2)

Table 3: EI Influence on EP

F = 75.998, Sig. = 0.000; R = 0.855, R² = 0.731, Adjusted R Square = 0.721; **p ≤ 0.01.

Moreover, from the mean and SD analysis shown in Table 2, it was found that the overall EI was at a high level (mean = 4.13, SD = 0.541). Considering each aspect, it was found that it was at a high level in all aspects, namely social skills (x³) with the highest average (mean = 4.17, SD = 0.544), followed by the aspect of self-regulation (x¹) (mean = 4.14, SD = 0.656) and motivation (x²) (mean = 4.06, SD = 0.739).

H2: Reward Management (RM) influences Employee Performance (EP).

In Table 4, the decision coefficient (R²) is 0.861 which indicates that 86.1% of RM’s factors are responsible for EP, while 13.9% are due to other influences. The test also found that recognition (x⁴) (p-value ≤ 0.01) had the greatest influence on EP, followed by promotion (x⁶) (p-value ≤ 0.01). The coefficients of the variables in the standard score form (Beta) were x⁴ = 0.374, x⁶ = 0.331, and x⁵ = 0.283, respectively. The results of RM for Thai motor service and repair companies’ EP from the standard scores are as follows:

Z = 0.374x⁴ + 0.283x⁵ + 0.331x⁶       (3)

Table 4: RM Influence on EP

F = 173.397, Sig. = 0.000; R = 0.928, R² = 0.861, Adjusted R Square = 0.856; **p ≤ 0.01

Moreover, from the mean and SD analysis shown in Table 2, it was found that the overall RM was at a high level (mean = 4.15, SD = 0.564). Considering each aspect, it was found that it was at a high level in all aspects, namely recognition (x⁴) with the highest average (mean = 4.22, SD = 0.618), followed by the aspect of the promotion (x⁶ ) mean = 4.17, SD = 0.597) and bonus (x⁵) (mean = 4.07, SD = 0.591).

H3: Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) influences Employee Performance (EP).

In Table 5, the decision coefficient (R²) is 0.853, indicating that 85.3% of OHS’s factors are responsible for EP, while 14.7% are due to other influences. The test also found that leisure (X⁹) (p-value ≤ 0.01) had the greatest influence on EP, followed by Protection of employee (X⁸) (p-value ≤ 0.01). The coefficients of the variables in the standard score form (Beta) were x⁹ = 0.591, x⁸ = 0.414, and x⁷ = 0.173, respectively. The results of HRM for Thai RRSM companies from the standard scores are as follows:

Z = 00.591x⁷ + 0.414x⁸ + 0.173x⁹       (4)

Table 5: OHS Influence on EP

F = 162.298, Sig. = 0.000; R = 0.924, R² = 0.853, Adjusted R Square = 0.848; **p ≤ 0.01.

5. Discussion

The analysis of the literature and theory led to the selection of four main variables, 12 supporting aspects, and three hypotheses concerning employee performance. The main variables included emotional intelligence (EI), reward management (RM), occupational health and safety (OHS), and employee performance (EP) within a Thai motor service, repair, and sales firm.

After that, simple random sampling was used to identify the survey participants and then ask for their participation in their employer’s study on employee performance. Due to COVID-19 concerns and for response convenience, the questionnaires were available online using Google Forms. SPSS for Windows version 21 was used to calculate the mean and SD, as well as to conduct the multiple linear regression analysis (MLRA). From this process, the following discussion is presented.

5.1. Emotional Intelligence (EI)

The results revealed that EI was the weakest of the three hypotheses on EP (0.731) when analyzed. However, the contributing variables were all ranked at a ‘high’ level by the respondents with social skills (x²) being the strongest (mean = 4.17, SD = 0.544), self-regulation (x¹) being second (mean = 4.14, SD = 0.656), and motivation (x²) being third in importance (mean = 4.06, SD = 0.739). These findings are consistent with Rodrangsee et al. (2022) whose research on multiple intelligences pointed out the importance of emotional intelligence in strong social skills.

Moreover, of the nine items evaluated for EI, the strongest response was received for “I have patience and can wait” (mean = 4.23, SD = 0.773), followed by “I am willing to lose some personal benefits if it is necessary for the common good” (mean = 4.22, SD = 0.620). Interestingly, boredom appears to be a problem as the item “I am interested and enjoy my work” was ranked lowest (mean = 3.93, SD = 0.881).

5.2. Reward Management (RM)

The results revealed that RM was the strongest of the three hypotheses on EP (0.861) when analyzed. Additionally, the contributing variables were all ranked at a ‘high’ or ‘highest’ level by the respondents with recognition (x⁴) being the strongest (mean = 4.22, SD = 0.618), promotion (x⁶) being second (mean = 4.17, SD = 0.597), and bonus (x⁵) being the weakest in importance (mean = 4.07, SD = 0. 0.591).

Moreover, of the nine items evaluated for RM, the strongest response was received for “I am respected by my colleagues” (mean = 4.28, SD = 0.801), followed by “I am recognized by my supervisors for my skills and competence” (mean = 4.22, SD = 0.783). Interesting, there might be concern among the staff concerning their benefits as the item “The welfare provided by my company is appropriate” was ranked lowest (mean = 4.01, SD = 0.780).

5.3. Occupational Health and Safety (OHS)

The results revealed that OHS was second in the strength of the three hypotheses on EP (0.853) when analyzed. Additionally, the contributing variables were all ranked at a ‘high’ or ‘highest’ level by the respondents with protection of employee (x⁸) being the strongest (mean = 4.23, SD = 0.520), leisure (x⁹) being second (mean = 4.14, SD = 0.606), and working environment (x7) being the weakest in importance (mean = 4.12, SD = 0.659).

Moreover, of the 11 items evaluated for OHS, the strongest response was received for “Company employees can complain if they feel they are treated unfairly” (mean = 4.28, SD = 0.677), followed by “My company has a process to protect employee personal information” (mean = 4.25, SD = 0.833). Interesting, there might be concern among the staff concerning the cleanliness of their workplace as the item “My workplace is clean with no foul odors” was ranked lowest (mean = 3.75, SD = 0.874).

6. Conclusion and Limitations

The study sought to investigate the factors most important to employee performance in the Asia Engineering & Service (Thailand) Co. Ltd. in Bangkok, Thailand. The multiple linear regression analysis and descriptive statistics analysis determined that the employee’s overall perceptions of their employers’ emotional intelligence (EI), reward management (RM), occupational health and safety (OHS), on employee performance (EP) were at a high level.

Moreover, from the mean and SD analysis shown in Table 2, it was found that of the 12 observed variables analyzed, the protection of employees was judged to be highest in importance (mean = 4.23, SD = 0.520), closely followed by recognition (x4) (mean = 4.22, SD = 0.618). When the questionnaire items were reviewed, the items “I am respected by my colleagues” (mean = 4.28, SD = 0.801) and “Company employees can complain if they feel they are treated unfairly” (mean = 4.28, SD = 0.677) were judged as statements the respondents agreed with most. “My workplace is clean with no foul odors” was ranked lowest (mean = 3.75, SD = 0.874).

One study limitation is that the sample survey comes from only one firm within the Bangkok metropolitan area. It is also limited by its population being from an industrial sector related to electric motors. It is expected that survey items concerning employee performance within others sectors will probably yield different results.

There also seems to be a strong theme from the study that employee praise and recognition are essential in Thai employee performance success. Therefore, follow on studies could investigate what forms of praise and recognition are most effective. Items can include paid holidays, company trips to the beach/mountains, bonuses, housing allowances, or transportation expenses reimbursement.