Job Hopping
TABLE OF CONTENT
Introduction 2 Background and Scope of Study 3 Hypothesis 5 Objective of study 6 Significant of study 7 Limitation of study 8 Literature Review 9 Findings Results 12 Theoritical Framework 22 References 29
Introduction On our selection and finding for our research on Human Resource Management project. We agreed on the topic of “Job hopping, does is it due to a normal employment trend situation or based on certain level of age/generation affected?” Over the past decades the problem of job-hopping has became a problem on every Human Resource department on every organization. In today’s economic uncertainty, for employees will see job-hopping as a way to provide job security for them. Employees often leave before downsizing occurs or take temporary jobs to pay the bills after layoffs have occurred, looking out for themselves and their families. Employees want work-life balance benefits to retain their quality of life and loyalty to family, not company, as well as career enhancement benefits to provide skills for their next job should a layoff occur. Based on generation affected, it’s all depending on the level of attitude and loyalties they have on certain organization they work with. They may have some self ownership and responsibilities over companies operations and results. But not all of the generation was having the same opinion and it is now clear that this is an employment trend that affects every subsequent generation.
Background and Scope of study The background of our study is focus on certain generation that exist and currently working or near retiring age. Based on Malaysian employment trend, the age usually for retirement especially in government sector is around 58 years old while for private sector usually longer than it. They are few generation that we taken as consideration such as Traditionalists (born 1925-1940) which will be aged 80 to 70 years old, Baby Boomers (born 1941-1960) which will be aged 69 to 50 years
Introduction 2 Background and Scope of Study 3 Hypothesis 5 Objective of study 6 Significant of study 7 Limitation of study 8 Literature Review 9 Findings Results 12 Theoritical Framework 22 References 29
Introduction On our selection and finding for our research on Human Resource Management project. We agreed on the topic of “Job hopping, does is it due to a normal employment trend situation or based on certain level of age/generation affected?” Over the past decades the problem of job-hopping has became a problem on every Human Resource department on every organization. In today’s economic uncertainty, for employees will see job-hopping as a way to provide job security for them. Employees often leave before downsizing occurs or take temporary jobs to pay the bills after layoffs have occurred, looking out for themselves and their families. Employees want work-life balance benefits to retain their quality of life and loyalty to family, not company, as well as career enhancement benefits to provide skills for their next job should a layoff occur. Based on generation affected, it’s all depending on the level of attitude and loyalties they have on certain organization they work with. They may have some self ownership and responsibilities over companies operations and results. But not all of the generation was having the same opinion and it is now clear that this is an employment trend that affects every subsequent generation.
Background and Scope of study The background of our study is focus on certain generation that exist and currently working or near retiring age. Based on Malaysian employment trend, the age usually for retirement especially in government sector is around 58 years old while for private sector usually longer than it. They are few generation that we taken as consideration such as Traditionalists (born 1925-1940) which will be aged 80 to 70 years old, Baby Boomers (born 1941-1960) which will be aged 69 to 50 years
References: • Benson, D. and R.H. Ziedonis, “Corporate Venture Capital as a Window on New Technologies: Implications for the Performance of Corporate Investors When Acquiring Startups,” Organization Science, 20(2): 329-351, 2009. • Agarwal, R., M. Ganco, and R.H. Ziedonis, “Reputations for Toughness in Patent Enforcement: Implications for Knowledge Spillovers via Inventor Mobility,” Strategic Management Journal, 30(13): 1349-1374, 2009 (Lead Article). • Tulgan, Bruce. 2004. Trends point to a dramatic generational shift in the future workforce. Employment Relations Today 30:23-31. • Tyler, Kathryn. 2006. Stress management. HR Magazine 51:79-83. • Weils, Susan J. 2007. Are you too family friendly? HR Magazine 52:35. • Muetzel, Michael R. 2003. They’re not aloof… just generation X. Shreveport,LA: Steel Bay Publishing. • Phillips, Jean M., Mary Pomerantz and Stanley M. Gully. 2007. Plugging theboomer drain. HR Magazine 52:54-58. • Shelton, Charlotte and Laura Shelton. 2005. The next revolution. Mountain View, California: Davies-Black Publishing. • Smola, Karen W. and Charlotte D. Sutton. 2002. Generational differences:Revisiting generational work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior 23:363-382. • Society for Human Resource Management. Generational Difference Survey Report, 2004. http://www.shrm.org/hrresources/surveys_published/bydate/Generati onal%20Differences%20Survey%20Report.pdf