how a merger in the operational combination stage affects employee motivation

UPPSALA UNIVERSITY

Department of Business Studies

Bachelor Thesis

Spring 2010

Authors: Martin Malmström

Henrik Orre

Supervisor: Christina Hultbom

HOW A MERGER IN THE OPERATIONAL COMBINATION

STAGE AFFECTS EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION

A quantitative case study of a Swedish professional service firm

Abstract

This paper aims to examine how employee motivation is affected during the operational combination stage of a

merger between two relatively small Swedish professional service firms. This is done through a quantitative

study conducted by examining the relationship between employee motivation and three approaches; social

identity, role conflict and acculturation. Those approaches were first by themselves tested in order to examine

the relationship between their respective indicators that represent respective approach. The main result of this

study is that the three approaches have a positive significant impact on employee motivation. Therefore, it is

important for the professional service firm to take those variables into consideration when formulating future

strategies and when trying to improve the organizational climate.

Keywords: Merger, employee motivation, operational combination stage, social identity theory, role conflict

theory, acculturation theory

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

2

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 4

2. THEORETICAL APPROACH .......................................................................................... 7

2.1 Employee Motivation ................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Social identity theory ................................................................................................... 8

2.3 Role conflict theory ...................................................................................................... 9

2.4 Acculturation theory .................................................................................................. 11

2.5 An analytical framework ............................................................................................ 12

3. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 14

3.1 The professional service firm ..................................................................................... 14

3.2 Quantitative study ...................................................................................................... 15

3.2.1 Statistical methodology ...................................................................................... 16

3.3 Variables .................................................................................................................... 16

3.3.1 Workplace identity ............................................................................................. 17

3.3.2 Relationship ........................................................................................................ 17 3.3.3 Communication .................................................................................................. 17

3.3.4 Social Identity .................................................................................................... 17 3.3.5 Preparation ......................................................................................................... 18 3.3.6 Understanding .................................................................................................... 18

3.3.1 Role Conflict ...................................................................................................... 18 3.3.2 Efficiency ........................................................................................................... 19

3.3.1 Acculturation ...................................................................................................... 19 3.3.2 Employee motivation ......................................................................................... 20

4. RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 21

4.1 Quantitative results .................................................................................................... 21

4.1.1 Control variables ................................................................................................ 21 4.1.2 Workplace identity ............................................................................................. 22 4.1.3 Relationship ........................................................................................................ 22

4.1.4 Communication .................................................................................................. 22 4.1.5 Social identity ..................................................................................................... 23

4.1.6 Preparation ......................................................................................................... 23 4.1.7 Understanding .................................................................................................... 24 4.1.8 Role conflict ....................................................................................................... 24

4.1.9 Efficiency ........................................................................................................... 25 4.1.10 Acculturation ...................................................................................................... 25 4.1.11 Employee motivation ......................................................................................... 26

4.1.12 Open ended question .......................................................................................... 26

5. ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................... 28

5.1 Workplace identity ..................................................................................................... 28

5.2 Relationship ............................................................................................................... 28

5.3 Communication .......................................................................................................... 28

5.4 Social identity ............................................................................................................ 29

3

5.5 Preparation ................................................................................................................. 30

5.6 Understanding ............................................................................................................ 30

5.7 Role conflict ............................................................................................................... 30

5.8 Efficiency ................................................................................................................... 31

5.9 Acculturation .............................................................................................................. 31

5.10 Employee motivation ................................................................................................. 32

6. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION ....................................................................................... 34

7. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 36

APPENDIX 1 ........................................................................................................................... 39

APPENDIX 2 ........................................................................................................................... 41

APPENDIX 3 ........................................................................................................................... 43

Statistical methodology ........................................................................................................ 43

Results .................................................................................................................................. 44

Results for hypothesis 1 ................................................................................................... 44

Results for hypothesis 2 ................................................................................................... 45 Results for hypothesis 3 ................................................................................................... 46

Results for hypothesis 4 ................................................................................................... 47 APPENDIX 4 ........................................................................................................................... 49

4

1. INTRODUCTION

To survive in a competitive market firms has to develop a long run strategy to

maintain or expand their market share, one common strategy is to merge with or acquire

another firm. Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) are transactions of great significance by

which two companies are combined together to achieve strategic and business objectives.

Regardless if an M&A is a success or a failure it has an enormous impact on communities,

shareholders, lenders, competitors and employees since companies invest millions of dollars

while involved in M&A activity (Sudarsanam, 2003). Owing the financial crisis in 2008, the

total volume and value of M&A deals have decreased but on the other hand the crisis may

create lucrative business opportunities since stock prices dramatically decrease and companies

are consolidating their businesses (Raukko, 2009).

Executives that are involved in M&A activity would argue that it is a rational behavior

and in the long-term interest of their company and shareholders. M&A activity is used as a

tool for everything from increasing market share to diversifying products and services;

gaining operational flexibility and new skills; improving innovation and learning; reducing

managerial deadwood and increasing global competitiveness (Auster & Sirower, 2002). Thus,

the executives’ have legitimate arguments for involving their firms in M&A activity.

However, the general success of M&A activity is inconclusive (Guerro, 2008):

Statistics show that 75 percent of all mergers and acquisitions in the US fail and only 15

percent manage to reach their financial goals. According to a similar study conducted in

Europe by Schuler and Jackson (2001), half of all M&As actually destroyed value instead of

increasing it and only 17 percent created value. Bhal et al. (2009) demonstrate that about two-

thirds of all M&As that failed to achieve the desired result did so because the senior

management did not consider the employees reactions or interests.

During 2009, financial distress has continued to be a challenge throughout various

industries and troubled companies looked into aligning with larger, stronger players in order

to survive in a competitive market. To reach new strategic objectives and compete in the

market a storm of mergers has taken place (Focarino & Wu, 2009).

Mergers can be categorized into three types: horizontal, vertical and conglomerate

mergers. Each type corresponds to a specific need of the merging firms. Horizontal mergers

combine two competitive firms with the same set of products and customers. Vertical mergers

are when two firms want to get access to the whole distribution chain. Conglomerate mergers

occur when two firms want to diversify their business. This type of merger is divided into two

5

sub-types; market-extension mergers and product-extension mergers. A market-extension

merger is when firms that sell the same type of products merge to get access to new markets.

Product-extension mergers are characterized by firms that merge to gain advantages from

diversifying its product range. The merged firms products are similar but do not directly

compete and through the merger they expand into a bigger player (Amburgey & Miner,

1992).

Changes caused by a merger affect the organizational climate, work assignments and

group dynamics which have shown to have a significant effect on employee motivation

(Locke & Latham, 2004). The organization’s performance is affected by psychological

responses of employees and the correlation becomes clearer during drastic organizational

change like a merger. This may result in negative behavior like absence and even acts of

sabotage on the other hand it can result in positive behavior like more commitment and

loyalty (Bhal et al., 2009).

According to Seo and Hill (2005), there are four different stages in a merger process

and each stage has different effects on the employees in the merged company. These stages

are: pre-merger, initial planning and formal combination, operational combination and

standardization, see table 1 in Appendix 1. The most significant effects on employee

motivation occur during the operational combination stage which is the actual integration of

organizational functions and day-to-day operations. During this process budgets, work

assignments, reporting responsibilities are redistributed and employees are forced to learn

new ways of handling their operations, managing new performance requirements and

adopting a new corporate culture. The changes often leads to issues for employees and

researchers have determined three significant sources that occur during this stage that derive

from the social identity, role conflict and acculturation which has an impact on employee

motivation (Seo & Hill, 2005; Locke & Latham, 2004). Qualitative studies have previously

established that these three approaches derive employee motivation. However, the statistical

relationship between these variables are yet unknown.

Researchers have stressed that managers need to examine the consequences of the

human perspective in a merger and especially the impact on employee motivation. During the

operational combination stage of a merger there should be a possibility for employees to

improve their way of handling their day-to-day operations and therefore increase their

motivation and the firms’ efficiency. As a result, one of the most valuable assets in a merged

firm is the employees which are consequently one of the key components to finalize the

mergers’ goal for value creation (Zhou et al., 2008).

6

An industry whose core competence lies within their human capital is the professional

service firm industry. The firms in this industry rely on their employees and their knowledge

to gain a competitive advantage. Therefore, it is interesting to observe how employee

motivation is affected in this particular industry after a merger.

In February 2009 a merger took place between two relatively small Swedish

professional service firms’ whose strategic purpose was to expand the firms’ supply of

services and become more competitive within their industry and doing so through a product-

extension merger. However, organizational changes were not implemented until September

2009. In January 2010 they started to share the same physical office where they began with

the actual integration of organizational functions and operations, in which employee

motivation might become affected.

Hence, this paper aims to examine how employee motivation is affected during the

operational combination stage of a merger between two relatively small Swedish professional

service firms. This is done through a quantitative study conducted by examining the

relationship between employee motivation and three approaches; social identity, role conflict

and acculturation. Furthermore, those approaches are by themselves tested in order to

examine the relationship between those indicators that represent respective underlying theory.

This is done in order to get an apprehension about which variables that derives employee

motivation.

The outline of the paper is as follows; the concepts of employee motivation, social

identity theory, role conflict theory and acculturation theory are briefly presented in part 2

which combined develop an analytical framework. Part 3 discuss the underlying methodology

behind the research, which also include the relevant variables that were used to conduct the

survey. In part 4, the results of the study are presented and part 5 analyzes the results using

the analytical framework to analyze the results. Finally, part 6 concludes the paper and

provides suggestions for further research.

7

2. THEORETICAL APPROACH

According to Seo and Hill (2005), the existing literature in the field of human behavior

and psychological responses to mergers has accumulated descriptive data about how

employees have experienced the organizational change that a merger process implies. Based

on their literature review they have identified six theoretical approaches that, explicitly or

implicitly, explain how employees react to merger activity. These approaches include anxiety

theory, social identity theory, acculturation theory, role conflict theory, job characteristics

theory and organizational justice theory. Each theoretical approach has indentified problems

that occur during a merger process, predicts the human behavior and psychological effect on

employees and finally suggests recommendations for how to handle the problems. The

essentials of the theoretical approaches are summarized in table 2 in Appendix 1.

As previously mentioned, the three most significant sources of problems that occur

during the operational combination stage derive from the social identity theory, role conflict

theory and acculturation theory which has an impact on employee motivation. Each approach

derives indicators that affect respective approach which will result in hypotheses that will be

tested later on in the paper. Finally, the relationship between the three approaches and

employee motivation results in a fourth hypothesis.

2.1 Employee Motivation

Employee motivation can be explained as both intrinsic factors that drive actions and

extrinsic factors that serve as encouragement to actions (Locke & Latham, 2004). The

intrinsic motivators are the individuals desire to do activities, regardless of whether it is a

hobby or a work assignment. Extrinsic motivators are factors that are used to try to affect

individuals’ motivation (Tremblay et al., 2009). Employee motivation can affect three aspects

of actions which are direction, intensity and duration. The first aspect, direction, implies that

the individual has an opportunity to choose which way work will progress. The second aspect,

intensity, refers to how much effort an individual put into work. The third aspect, duration,

explains how persistent an individual are at work. These three aspects of action has a

significant impact on how an employee’ performs and utilizes skills at work (Locke &

Latham, 2004).

Employee motivation theory is also divided into cognitive theory and process theories.

Cognitive theory is based on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs which states that employees’

behavior will focus on satisfying lower needs in order to be able to reach a higher level on the

8

hierarchy of needs. It is also assumed that if the individuals’ needs are unsatisfied it will

change its behavior to achieve self-satisfaction which can result in inadequate work

performance. Therefore, managers have to recognize that the individual needs depend on

where they find themselves in the hierarchy of needs (Udechukwu, 2009).

A merger is a period of turbulence where managers’ role becomes more important

since they play a vital and distinct role during this period of organizational change. They play

the role as a mediator in order to reach the inside of each employee and utilize their skills in a

more efficient way. To effectively motivate employees during a merger, a manager need to

deal with each person one at a time and ask questions, listening to and working together one-

on-one. A good manager helps people to find satisfaction in their work during a merger and

therefore increase their motivation (Kreisman, 2002).

2.2 Social identity theory

The social identity theory implies that an individuals’ identity is a result of its

membership in groups and was originally developed by Tajfel and Turner (1979). According

to Ried and Giles (2005), the theory has expanded since then and has become the basis for a

general social identity approach to the field of social psychology.

In the case of mergers, several identities can be recognized and changed during an

M&A process, namely; the organizational, professional and workgroup identity (Seo & Hill,

2005). The focus in this paper is the organizational change during the merger process and

hence the focus will be on the organizational and workgroup identity. The organizational

identity represents the characteristics that are associated with individuals’ membership inside

a group within an organization. Mergers usually force employees in one or both organizations

to abandon their old organizational identity, and adapt a new identity. The social identity

theory assumes that, in this process, employees will try to reach a positive position outcome

for their own group in the new organizational identity. This can create strong out-group1 or in-

group2 biases since the individual only focuses on their own positive outcome and not the

organizations and in turn generate inter-organizational relationship conflicts. The conflicts

may impose a shock for the employees’ in whom they feel denial and disbelief towards the

merger process. Furthermore, employees in lower status workgroups within the company who

do not accept that other workgroups have a higher legitimate status will likely have a more

negative reaction to the merger and will identify themselves less with the new organization

1 Out-group bias is the treatment an individual give to a non-member of a group.

2 In-group bias is the treatment an individual give to a member of a group.

9

compared to the workgroups with higher legitimate status. On the other hand, high status

workgroups can also react negatively towards the merger since they could believe that their

superior status is threatened. Low status workgroups who believe that the merger has a

positive effect that can generate synergies for their organization will try to dis-identify with

their current identity and will adapt to the new identity even faster. This is a source of stress

which may lead to lower work motivation and higher job dissatisfaction (Seo & Hill, 2005).

These issues can be addressed and according to previous research (Terry & O’Brien,

2001), it is important to establish to what extent the employees are attached to their current

identities and institute arrangements to assure that the new identity is seen as more attractive.

The managers of the newly merged organization should try to develop an in-group identity

and do this by encouraging communication between the two groups in order to create a

supportive and positive environment. Furthermore, the organizational culture is rooted in its

symbols and values. Therefore, a new company name, logo, consolidation or termination of

brands and corporate value statements play a crucial role in shaping the new common

identity.

The variables that derive from social identity theory are relationship and workplace

identity. According to the theory these indicators explain how employees perceive their

situation at work. Communication is in this case important to see how managers have

succeeded in encouraging interaction between the employees to create belongingness among

them. Hence, we present the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 1: Workplace identity, relationship and level of communication

are positively correlated to social identity theory during the operational

combination stage of a merger.

Social identity = workplace identity + relationship + communication Equation (1)

2.3 Role conflict theory

The role conflict theory implies that psychological tensions occur when individuals’

are involved in different roles that are not compatible with each other (Katz & Kahn, 1978).

The uncertainty about what is and what is not expected in a role might result in a conflict,

either interpersonal or intrapersonal. A group role is defined by the individuals’ expectations

of its own role inside a group.

10

An organizational integration process implies interrupting the incumbent company

culture, structure, job arrangements to form new agreements. These transitions are often

neither done in a short-term perspective nor made distinctly, which often results in a long

period of managerial interventions in order to finalize the transactions between the two

organizations. In turn this results in role conflicts and ambiguity in the newly formed

organization (Seo & Hill, 2005).

Employees might experience role conflicts as an effect of new job requirements that

emerge from the merger. Correspondingly with the above, employees may also experience

role conflicts when they are not sure how to tackle the situation regarding how to remain loyal

to both old customers and old co-workers and at the same time implement the organizational

changes that are required by the merger (Seo & Hill, 2005). Furthermore, employees may also

feel threatened that they will lose their job because of the mergers since a more competitive

organization has been formed. This ambiguity is a source of stress which can lead to lower

work motivation and higher job dissatisfaction (Igbaria & Guimaraes, 1993).

According to previous research (Bastien, 1987; Mark & Mirvis, 1992), the above

mentioned issues can be addressed by bidirectional communication which implies active

organizational listening of sources for role conflicts and subsequent responses to the role-

related issues. Furthermore, strong managerial leadership can assist by clarifying and

developing the new roles for the employees in the merged organization. This may demand

that managers negotiate role expectations in one-on-one discussion with the employees.

The variables that derive from role conflict theory are preparation and understanding.

According to the theory these factors explain if employees experience ambiguity in their work

assignments or in other situations at their work place. The variable role conflict is in this

paper tested to which extent the firm has avoided role conflicts. Hence, we present the

following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 2: Preparation and understanding are positively correlated to role

conflict during the operational combination stage of a merger.

Role Conflict = preparation + understanding Equation (2)

11

2.4 Acculturation theory

Acculturation is defined as the exchange of culture attributes between individuals or

groups. When the integration process between two groups has started the original culture of

one or both groups alters, but, the groups still remain distinct towards each other. In the

context of mergers, acculturation involves the overall combinations of corporate values,

beliefs and culture that define an organization (Kottak, 2005).

The acculturation process can occur in four different modes, deculturation,

assimilation, separation and integration (Berry, 1980). They are all applicable to the context

of mergers in order to explain the different ways which the two organizations adapt and

resolve conflicts with each other. First, deculturation implies that members of an organization

do not hold on to their old culture or replace it with a new one. Second, assimilation is when

members of an organization adopt the culture of the other organization in a merger. Third,

separation is when members of both organizations keep their original cultural identity and

refuse to adapt to the other organizations identity. Finally, the integration process implies that

there is some degree of organizational change in both companies. Which mode that will be

triggered in a merger process depends on the relative strength of factors that cause the need

for organizational integration, for example a horizontal or vertical integration, and the factors

that drive cultural differentiation, for example the strength of organizational identity and how

attractive the other culture is according to the other part.

According to Seo and Hill (2005), the acculturative issues will be high if the

individuals within an organization try to keep their own culture and the pressure for

organizational integration is strong and vice-versa. Acculturation conflicts have been referred

to as a culture clash (Elsass & Veiga, 1994) which arises when organizations first notice the

different ways of handling their operations. Culture clash can in worst case result in attacking

the other organization and defending their own. The reaction is even more likely when

organizations feel threatened by losing their familiar way of handling things.

These issues can be addressed by doing a cultural due diligence analysis in order to

assess information about a potential culture clash and with that information try to smooth the

progress of bringing the two cultures together (Marks, 1999). The analysis can provide

realistic assumptions of the cultural differences and activate proactive planning to address

these issues. Elsass and Veiga (1994) present actions to encourage and ease integrations

between the two organizational cultures. They primarily promote intercultural learning

12

through presentations and workshops together with employees’ to create awareness regarding

these issues.

The variables that derive from acculturation theory are efficiency and communication.

Efficiency explains how the employees are able to perform in the new corporate environment.

Communication in this case explains if the managers have improved their communication

with the employees which is important to minimize problems surrounding acculturation

issues. Hence, we present the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 3: Efficiency and communication are positively correlated to

acculturation during the operational combination stage of a merger.

Acculturation = efficiency + communication Equation (3)

2.5 An analytical framework

An analytical framework is developed in figure 1 in order to examine the relationship

between employee motivation and the three approaches; social identity, role conflict and

acculturation. Furthermore, those approaches are by themselves tested in order to examine the

relationship between those indicators that represent respective underlying theory. The

rectangles in the framework represent a variable that only have one indicator and the ovals

represent a variable with more than one indicator.

First, social identity derives the variables relationship, workplace identity and

communication and their relationship to social identity is tested in accordance with hypothesis

1. Second, role conflict derives the variables preparation and understanding and their

relationship to role conflict is tested in accordance with hypothesis 2. Third, acculturation

derives the variables efficiency and communication and their relationship to acculturation

theory is tested in accordance with hypothesis 3. Finally, the three variables social identity,

role conflict and acculturation all affect employee motivation. Hence, we present the

following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4: Social identity, role conflict and acculturation are positively

correlated to employee motivation during the operational combination stage of

a merger.

Employee motivation = social identity + role conflict + acculturation Equation (4)

13

Figure 1 Analytical framework

14

3. METHODOLOGY

The four hypotheses will be tested on the professional service firm with data that have

been collected through questionnaires. The collected data will be of quantitative nature since

we want to reach statistical significance in our research and that requires a great number of

observations which is hard to obtain by conducting qualitative interviews. The questions used

in the questionnaires are inspired by Gulati and Teo (2008) and modified in order to fit this

paper.

This section starts by introducing the professional service firm and continues by

describing the operationalization of the quantitative study and the variables used in the

questionnaire. Finally, the statistical methodology that was used to analyze the collected data

is briefly described.

3.1 The professional service firm

To select an appropriate case firm the merger had to have taken place within the last

one and a half year and a physical fusion had to have taken place. The reasons for these

conditions are that the merger has to be in the operational combination stage at the time of the

survey. The goal was to get approximately 50 respondents in order to conduct a significant

analysis.

When a suitable firm had been chosen primary data was collected through a census3

(N=149) of the professional service firm. The research was conducted given the assumption

that the whole office should react to the changes in terms of company culture, vision and

goals. In February 2009 the two existing professional service firms merged and in September

2009 they started working together but in separate offices. They moved into a mutual physical

office in January 2010. With respect for the firm and the employees’ anonymity the specific

units and their activity is not presented in this paper.

The newly merged professional service firm employs 149 staff members, 109

originally belonged to one firm and 40 to the other firm, 82 are females and 67 are males. The

new firm has adopted the relatively larger firms’ name. The employees are divided into five

categories; IT, economy, human resources, market and professional service employees. The

professional service employees have an academic background and are divided into three

different departments. Two of the departments consist of three work groups each and one

3 A census is a survey of all individuals’ in the total population

15

department consists of two work groups. The head of each department forms together with the

Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Head of IT, Human Resource

Manager and Marketing Director the senior management of the firm. During the survey the

classifications have been senior professional service employees’, professional service

employees’ and administrators. The reason for this is because the anonymity of employees

working in small work groups shall be protected. The firm employs 35 senior professional

service employees’, 67 professional service employees’ and 47 administrators.

The merger between the two firms was a product-extension merger and only a small

fraction of the employees left the firm after the merger took place. The reason for that few

employees left the firm is mainly because their competence is needed in order for the

professional service firm to widen its supply of services and reach their strategic objective.

This implies that the bias from employees that left the firms is small.

3.2 Quantitative study

During the development of the questionnaire similar studies were examined, for

example Gulati and Teo (2008), and important questions in comparable studies were adopted

and modified in order to suit this papers purpose. The questionnaire asks the respondents to

respond to each statement in terms of their own degree of agreement or disagreement. They

are instructed to select one of seven responses, for example: strongly agree (1), agree (2),

slightly agree (3), unchanged (4), slightly disagree (5), disagree (6), or strongly disagree (7).

The scale rating is known as a seven point Likert scale and is used in most of the variables

that are examined in this paper that have several answering alternatives in order to facilitate

the data processing. According to Cox (1980), the seven point Likert-scale has proven to be

superior to the nine point Likert-scale since the marginal utility you receive from the accuracy

is minimal and it adds the risk of confusing the respondent. The seven point Likert-scale

provides a neutral or unchanged alternative, which is important in this paper since the

employees might not have experienced any differences from their former workplace. To lower

the risk that too many answers were rated as neutral the seven point scale was chosen in front

of the five point scale (Cox, 1980).

The questionnaires were handed out in Swedish since the research was conducted on

respondents with Swedish as their mother tongue. The questionnaire is presented in Swedish

in table 1 in Appendix 2. In the end of the questionnaire the respondent was asked to answer

an open ended question whether they had any additional comments to the survey. The purpose

of this question was to get more specific information from respondents that want to stress

16

certain issues that the questionnaire did not mentioned. A pilot questionnaire was sent to two

respondents at the firm and the feedback lead to more suitable formulations. This reduced the

risk for ambiguity among the respondents and makes the data more reliable. All answers in

the survey are anonymous and a web-based questionnaire tool, www.netigate.se, was used to

collect data. This approach is easy to administrate, efficient and provides a distinct overview

of the respondents’ answers.

However, the methodology implies that any questions that arise from the respondents

during the filling out process will not be answered. This problem would be avoided during a

qualitative interview situation and also, technical problem may arise. In addition, a

quantitative survey only provides data and does not extend the research with detailed answers

(Kruger, 2003).

The employees had the opportunity to respond to the questionnaires during a period of

five working days. Additionally, a reminder was sent out after three working days. To avoid

the problem with respondents’ apprehending this email as junk mail and therefore ignoring it,

the CEO at the firm sent out the questionnaire. Other reasons that can affect the answering

frequency in a negative way are lack of time, lack of interest and confusion about the survey.

3.2.1 Statistical methodology

This paper does not aim to go in to technical details in the statistical methods used,

however, a short description about the statistical methodologies that are employed is

presented in Appendix 3 in the following order; Cronbach’s α (alpha), factor analysis,

Pearsons correlation analysis which all make the multiple regression analysis legitimate in

order to examine the relationship between the above mentioned equations. Each indicators

descriptive statistic are presented in the results section including mean, standard deviation,

minimum and maximum values. All the data from the questionnaires was analyzed with the

statistical software tool SPSS.

3.3 Variables

A detailed presentation of the variables and their indicators are presented in table 1 in

Appendix 2. The control variables used in the research are sex, age, time employed, work

category and if the work assignment has changes after the merger. The variables that have

been derived from the above mentioned theories are in this section presented in the following

order; workplace identity, relationship, communication, social identity, preparation,

understanding, role conflict, efficiency, acculturation and employee motivation.

17

3.3.1 Workplace identity

The purpose of this variable is to see if there is a difference in rang among the

employees within the professional service firm. The variable is measured by one indicator

which aims to measure the status of the respondents work group compared to other

workgroups within the organization (Workplace identity). This indicator is tested with a

three-graded scale with the answering alternatives higher, neutral or lower.

3.3.2 Relationship

The purpose of this variable is to see how the employees’ relationships have been

affected by the merger. This variable is divided into three indicators. The first indicator aims

to measure if the respondent’s relationship with co-workers has changes after the merger

(Relationship1). The second indicator aims to measure if the respondent’s relationship with

managers has changed after the merger (Relationship2). The third indicator aims to measure

the change in the respondents’ level of trust in the management (Relationship3). The

indicators are tested using a seven point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the

respondents range between much better (1) to much worse (7).

3.3.3 Communication

The communication variable is tested by dividing it into two indicators. The purpose

with this variable is to see if employees get sufficient information from their superiors. The

first indicator aims to measure in what way the managers’ communication with the

employees’ has been affected by the merger (Communication1). This indicator is tested using

a seven point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the respondents reach from Much better

(1) to Much worse (7). The second indicator aims to measure if the respondents are aware of

the underlying reasons for the merger (Communication2). This indicator is tested using a

seven point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the respondents range between strongly

agree (1) to strongly disagree (7).

3.3.4 Social Identity

The purpose of this variable is to measure how the merger has affected employee’s

social identity at the job site. This variable is divided into two indicators. The first indicator

aims to measure if the respondents are willing to accept the organizational changes caused by

the merger (Social identity1). The second indicator aims to measure to if the respondents see

themselves as a part of the new organization (Social identity2). Indicators one and two are

18

tested using a seven point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the respondents range

between strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (7).

3.3.5 Preparation

The purpose of this variable is to see if the managers thought of the consequences

for the employees caused by the merger. The variable is measured by one indicator which

aims to measure how the respondents believe that their managers prepared them for the

merger (Preparation). This indicator is tested using a seven point Likert-scale where the

alternatives for the respondents range between very good (1) to very bad (7).

3.3.6 Understanding

The purpose of this variable is to see how well the respondents know what is

expected from them after the merger. The variable is measured using one indicator which

aims to measure the employees’ understanding for their work assignments (Understanding).

The indicator is tested using a seven point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the

respondents range between much better (1) to much worse (7).

3.3.1 Role Conflict

The purpose of this variable is to measure the respondent’s expectations about the

new work role and if the respondent is involved in different roles that are not compatible with

each other. This variable is tested using three indicators which aim to measure how the

managers listen to the employees opinions since the merger (Role conflict1). This is tested

using a seven point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the respondents reach from much

better (1) to much worse (7). The second indicator aims to measure which of five alternatives

is most important for the respondents after the merger. This is tested by making the

respondents grade five alternatives (Role conflict2). No alternative can have the same grade

and this is tested to see where the employees’ loyalties may lie in a conflict situation. The first

alternative is loyalty to co-workers from the former firm, the second alternative is loyalty to

customers from the former firm, the third alternative is to accomplish the changes caused by

the merger, the fourth alternative is loyalty to new customers and the fifth and final alternative

is loyalty to current co-workers. A third indicator asked if the respondents experience that the

risk of losing their job is higher after the merger (Role conflict3). This is tested using a seven

point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the respondents vary between strongly agree (1)

19

to strongly disagree (2). The question for the role conflict variable is formulated to see what

the professional service firm has done to prevent role conflicts from occurring.

3.3.2 Efficiency

The purpose of this variable is to measure the employees’ opinion on how the merger

has affected the organizations efficiency. This variable is divided into three indicators. The

first indicator aims to measure the respondent’s opinions on how the efficiency in the

organizational structure has been affected by the merger compared to the efficiency of the

firm previously to the merger (Efficiency1). The second indicator aims to measure the

respondent’s opinion on how the efficiency in the decision making process has been affected

by the merger compared to the efficiency of the firm previously to the merger (Efficiency2).

These indicators are tested using a seven point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the

respondents reach from much better (1) to much worse (7). The third indicator aims to

measure the respondent’s opinion on how well her work group performs compared to other

work groups (Efficiency3). This indicator is tested using a seven point Likert-scale where the

alternatives for the respondents range between very good (1) to very bad (7).

3.3.1 Acculturation

The purpose of this variable is to measure the respondent´s opinion about the

organizational culture that developed after the merger. This variable is divided into two

control questions and three indicators. The first control question asks if the respondents knew

the old professional service firms core values (Acculturation control1). The second control

question asks if the respondents know the current company core values (Acculturation

control2). The control questions are tested using a scale with a simple yes or no. The first

indicator aims to measure how the respondents relate to the new company values compared to

the old one (Acculturation1). The second indicator aims to measure the respondents opinions

about the response from managers when making an extra hard work effort in the new

organization compared to the situation before the merger (Acculturation2). The third and final

indicator aims to measure the respondents overall feelings about the new work environment

compared to the old one (Acculturation3). Indicators one, two and three are all tested using a

seven point Likert-scale where the alternatives for the respondents range between much better

(1) to much worse (7).

20

3.3.2 Employee motivation

The purpose of this variable is to see to what extent the employees feel motivated to

work after the merger. This variable is divided into three indicators. The first indicator aims to

measure how the employees’ day-to-day operations have been affected by the merger

(Employee motivation1). The second indicator aims to measure how the merger affected the

employees’ work spirit (Employee motivation2). The third indicator aims to measure how the

respondent’ perceive co-workers work spirit compared to the situation before the merger

(Employee motivation3). These three indicators are tested using a seven point Likert-scale

where the respondents’ alternatives range between much better (1) to much worse (7).

21

4. RESULTS

The final answering frequency counted to 71 or 47.6 percent of the firms’ total

population. From these respondents 38 (54%) were female and 33 (46%) were male.

Furthermore, 23 (32%) were senior professional service employees’, 29 (41%) were

professional service employees’ and 19 (27%) were administrators. The answering frequency

for females was 46.3 percent and males 49.3 percent. The answering frequency was for the

senior professional service employees’ 65.7 percent, professional service employees’ 43.3

percent and for the administrators 40.4 percent.

4.1 Quantitative results

In this section the results from all variables are presented. Each variable is presented

with mean, minimum and maximum value, standard deviation and total sum of indicator. The

sum of each indicator should be interpreted against the minimum value since the best possible

value is 1, for example strongly agree (1), multiplied with the number of respondents.

A factor analysis with indicators that represent the same variable was conducted in

order to identify indicators that have a low degree of explanation and thus be detached to

improve the statistical relationship on the contemplated variable. The detachments were also

supported by Pearsons correlation analysis. This only corresponded with two indicators which

are explained under part 4.1.8 Role conflict.

To measure the internal consistency of the indicators Cronbach’s α will be presented

after each variable that have more than one indicator. The lowest acceptable value is ought to

be 0.60 (Hair et al., 1998).

4.1.1 Control variables

As previously mentioned the control variables sex, age, time employed, work category

and if the work assignments has changed because of the merger is used by the study. A

statistical analysis has been made to test their effect on the other variables and no relationship

has been identified and henceforth it will not be used in further discussions.

22

4.1.2 Workplace identity

TABLE 1 Workgroup identity

Mean N Minimum Maximum Standard deviation Sum

Workplace identity 1.92 71.00 1.00 3.00 0.65 136.00

Table 1 indicates that the respondents believe that their work group status is equal to

other workgroups within the firm (Workplace identity), this is explained by a mean of 1.92.

The sum should be interpreted towards a minimum value of 71 since the question has been

answered by 71 respondents and the minimum value for the question was 1.

4.1.3 Relationship

TABLE 2 Relationship


Relationship1 3.71 63.00 2.00 6.00 0.94 234.00

Relationship2 3.94 63.00 2.00 6.00 0.80 248.00

Relationship3 3.73 63.00 1.00 6.00 1.08 235.00

Table 2 indicates that the respondents’ relationship to co-workers (Relationship1) and

managers (Relationship2) is unchanged compared to the situation before the merger which is

explained by a mean close to 4. The respondents’ trust in the senior management

(Relationship3) is unchanged, this is explained by a mean of 3.73. The sum of the three

questions should be interpreted independently towards a minimum value of 63 since the

question has been answered by 63 respondents and the minimum value for each question was

1. (Cronbach’s α=0.805)

4.1.4 Communication

TABLE 3 Communication


Communication1 4.15 68.00 2.00 6.00 1.00 282.00

Communication2 2.11 63.00 1.00 7.00 1.50 133.00

Table 3 indicates that the respondents’ communication with managers is unchanged

compared to the situation before the merger (Communication1), this is explained by a mean

of 4.15. The sum of Communication1 should be interpreted towards a minimum value of 68

since the question has been answered by 68 respondents and the minimum value for each

question was 1. The respondents have a clear understanding for the reasons to merge the two

23

firms (Communication2), this is explained by a mean of 2.11. The sum of Communication2

should be interpreted towards a minimum value of 63 since the question has been answered

by 63 respondents and the minimum value for each question was 1. (Cronbach’s α=0.68)

4.1.5 Social identity

TABLE 4 Social identity


Social identity1 1.94 63.00 1.00 6.00 1.12 122.00

Social identity2 1.87 63.00 1.00 6.00 1.08 118.00

Table 4 indicates that the respondents’ are willing to accept the organizational changes

and adapt to the new organization (Social identity1), this is explained by a mean of 1.94. They

also see themselves as a part of the new organization (Social identity2), this is explained by a

mean of 1.87. The sum of the two questions should be interpreted independently towards a

minimum value of 63 since the question has been answered by 63 respondents and the

minimum value for each question was 1. (Cronbach’s α=0.783)

The results from the multiple regression analysis in Appendix 3 table 3 indicate that

workplace identity and communication has a positive correlation to social identity and is

statistical significant, with an alpha value lower then 0.05. The variable relationship show low

positive correlation with social identity and is not statistically significant.

4.1.6 Preparation

TABLE 5 Preparation


Preparation 3.52 67.00 1.00 7.00 1.54 236.00

Table 5 indicates that the respondents’ are moderately satisfied with the way their

managers have prepared them for the organizational changes followed by the merger

(Preparation), this is explained by a mean of 3.52. The sum should be interpreted towards a

minimum value of 67 since the question has been answered by 67 respondents and the

minimum value for each question was 1.

24

4.1.7 Understanding

TABLE 6 Understanding


Understanding 3.99 68.00 2.00 6.00 0.61 271.00

Table 6 indicates that the respondents’ understanding for their work assignments are

unchanged compared to the situation before the merger (Understanding), this is explained by

a mean of 3.99. The sum should be interpreted towards a minimum value of 68 since the

question has been answered by 68 respondents and the minimum value for each question was

1.

4.1.8 Role conflict

TABLE 7 Role conflict


Role conflict1 4,15 68,00 2,00 6,00 0,98 282,00

Table 7 indicates that the managers’ capability to take the respondents’ opinions in

consideration is unchanged by the merger (Role conflict1), this is explained by a mean close

to 4. The sum should be interpreted towards a minimum value of 68 since the question has

been answered by 68 respondents and the minimum value for each question was 1.

The question that asked the respondents’ to rank five alternatives (Role conflict2)

shows no clear relationship to the other indicators. The reason for this is most likely an

inappropriate coding of the indicator combined with a high level of variance between the

answers. The inappropriate coding resulted in misinterpretation of the question. The same

apply for the question that asked the respondents’ experience if the risk of losing their job is

higher after the merger (Role conflict3) shows no clear relationship to the other indicators.

The detachments were also supported by Pearsons correlation analysis. Therefore these

indicators are deducted from the variable role conflict and not presented in the table above.


preparation and understanding has a positive correlation to role conflict and is statistical

significant, with an alpha value lower then 0.05.

25

4.1.9 Efficiency

TABLE 8 Efficiency


Efficiency1 3.84 68.00 1.00 6.00 1.24 261.00

Efficiency2 4.12 68.00 1.00 7.00 1.22 280.00

Efficiency3 2.63 67.00 1.00 5.00 1.17 176.00

Table 8 indicates that the respondents’ believe that the efficiency in the new

organization is unchanged since the merger (Efficiency1), this is explained by a mean of 3.84.

The employees also believe that the efficiency in the decision-making process has been

unchanged by the merger (Efficiency2), this is explained by a mean of 4.12. The sum of

Efficiency1 and 2 should be interpreted towards a minimum value of 68 since the question

has been answered by 68 respondents and the minimum value for each question was 1. The

respondents’ believe that their own workgroups performance has been very good since the

merger (Efficieny3), this is explained by a mean of 2.63. The sum of Efficiency3 should be

interpreted towards a minimum value of 67 since the question has been answered by 67

respondents and the minimum value for each question was 1. (Cronbach’s α=0.711)

4.1.10 Acculturation

TABLE 9 Acculturation


Acculturation control1 1.10 63.00 1.00 2.00 0.30 69.00

Acculturation control2 1.22 63.00 1.00 2.00 0.42 77.00

Acculturation1 4.22 63.00 2.00 8.00 1.35 266.00

Acculturation2 4.00 63.00 2.00 7.00 1.06 252.00

Acculturation3 4.08 63.00 2.00 7.00 1.31 257.00

Table 9 indicates that most of the respondent’s knew both the old organizations core

values (Acculturation Control1) and the merged professional service firms core values

(Acculturation Control2), this is explained by that both questions has a mean close to 1.

Further, it explains that the respondents’ identify themselves with the new core values to the

same extent as before the merger (Acculturation1), this is explained by a mean of 4.22. The

respondents’ opinion on how an extra hard work effort pays of is the same as before the

merger (Acculturation2), this is explained by a mean of 4. The last question on acculturation

confirms that the respondents’ feel that the work environment on the new professional service

firm is equal to the work environment on the two separate firms (Acculturation3), this is

26

explained by a mean of 4.08. The sum of the five questions should be interpreted

independently towards a minimum value of 63 since the question has been answered by 63

respondents and the minimum value for each question was 1. (Cronbach’s α=0.709)


efficiency and communication have a positive correlation to acculturation and is statistical

significant, with an alpha value lower then 0.05.

4.1.11 Employee motivation

TABLE 10 Employee motivation


Employee motivation1 3.76 63.00 1.00 6.00 1.20 237.00



Table 10 explains that the respondents’ feel slightly more motivated then prior to the

merger. The organizational changes have made the respondents day-to-day operations a little

better (Employee motivation1), this is explained by a mean of 3.76. Further, the respondents

work spirit has increased to some extent since the merger (Employee motivation2), this is

explained by a mean of 3.65. They also believe that their co-workers work spirit has slightly

increased since the merger between the two firms (Employee motivation3), this is explained

by a mean of 3.68. The sum of the three questions should be interpreted independently

towards a minimum value of 63 since the question has been answered by 63 respondents and

the minimum value for each question was 1. (Cronbach’s α=0.864)


social identity, role conflict and acculturation have a positive correlation to employee

motivation and are statistical significant, with an alpha value lower then 0.05.

4.1.12 Open ended question

The administrative personnel in the merged organization feel that the amount of work

load has increased which have had a negative impact on their apprehension regarding the

merger. During a deeper look of how the administrative personnel have responded, it showed

that they are generally more dissatisfied about the merger compared to the other workgroup

categories. One of the employees describes the scenario accordingly:

27

“Just look in the dining room. The situation right now is that you eat together with the people

you work with, which is different from the situation before the merger. Everyone has so much

to do and are so stressed out that they become unsocial and don’t have the time for small talk.”

The open ended question have also identified that the employees from the relatively

smaller firm are more dissatisfied, compared to those from the larger firm, with the new

organizational culture and they feel less appreciated in the new organization. According to

two professional service employees’ from the relatively smaller firm, the new merged

organization is more results oriented and less caring then their former one which has

generated a less positive attitude towards the merger.

28

5. ANALYSIS

5.1 Workplace identity

The results from this indicator implies that the employees apprehend themselves and

their co-workers as equals and equally important for the professional service firm. The result

also imply that the administrators and the senior management consider themselves as equal

important which indicates that the professional service firm is a flat organization. As the

theory stated, if an employee apprehend her own workgroup identity as higher or lower

compared to others this may cause positive or negative feelings towards the merger and to

other workgroups. However, the employees’ in the professional service firm apprehend

themselves as equally important in general which the theory does not explain any further. In

this particular merger, the overall effect on most studied variables has been relatively

unchanged compared to the situation before the merger and the flat organization might be one

of the main reasons for that outcome.

5.2 Relationship

The employees’ general opinion is that the relationship towards managers and co-

workers has been unchanged or even improved because of the merger. This could be an effect

of that employees’ act in order to reach a positive outcome for their own group in the new

organizational identity. This can create out-group or in-group biases since the individual only

focuses on their positive outcome and not the new organization. The results of the open ended

questions might be a result of this since the employees’ from the relatively smaller of the two

firms have experienced that they feel outside of the new organization. A continued

apprehension of this kind may generate a relationship conflicts between the groups since the

employees’ from the relatively smaller firm perhaps feel disbelief against the merger process.

In order to counteract on this, the management of the new organization should try to develop

an in-group identity and do this to encouraging interaction between the groups to support a

positive work environment.

5.3 Communication

The result indicates that the employees’ have not experienced a change of how the

management communicates with them compared to before the merger. This may also imply

that the management has been communicating more frequently then usually. This is because

29

mergers generally force the management to communicate more than usually in order to make

the employees’ to take an active interest in the merger. If this communication from the

management would have been equivalent as before the merger, or worse, the result from the

survey in this variable would most likely been more dissatisfied employees’.

Furthermore, the results also indicate that the management has been communicating

the underlying objectives for the merger. This accord with the above since the management

likely has been communicating more than before the merger in order to making the

employees’ feel informed and aware of the situation.

5.4 Social identity

The results indicate that the general opinion of the employees’ is willing to accept new

organizational changes and adapt accordingly even after the merger. This implies that new

changes can be made and that the employees’ feel relatively satisfied with their current social

identity and is ready to adapt to the managements decisions regarding future strategies. The

result also indicates that the employees’ feel that they are a part of the new organization.

Organizational culture is rooted in its symbols and values. Therefore, the newly

formed organizations name and corporate value statements play an important role when

shaping a new social identity after a merger. This is something that the professional service

firm has succeeded with. However, the employees’ from the relatively smaller firm have

expressed that they do not feel as a part of the new organization and thenceforth not as

satisfied with their social identity in the new firm. This might be caused by the fact that the

merged firm has adopted the relatively larger firms’ name. Furthermore, the administrators

also indicate that they are less satisfied with their social identity.

Social identity is according to the theory derived by workplace identity, relationship

and communication. This relationship was tested from the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Workplace identity, relationship and level of communication

are positively correlated to social identity theory during the operational

combination stage of a merger.

Workplace identity and communication has a positively significant relationship to

social identity during the operational combination stage in this merger. However, relationship

is positively correlated to social identity but is not significant and no assumption can be made.

This is particularly interesting since the merger most likely had different effects on each

30

employee and generated no general opinions about this. As noticed in the open ended

questions the administrators and the employees’ that originated from the relatively smaller

firm were more dissatisfied then the rest of the employees and that might be a reason for the

insignificant result. Therefore, hypothesis 1 is not rejected or confirmed.

5.5 Preparation

The results indicates that the employees are moderately satisfied

with how their managers’ has prepared them for the upcoming merger this is likely because

they received sufficient amount of information of how the merger affects them. The

management has clarified roles for the employees in the merged firm, which has according to

the results worked out well. This implies that the employees do not experience any ambiguity

caused by inadequate preparations from the managers.

5.6 Understanding

The result indicates that the employees understanding for their own work

responsibilities are unchanged compared to before the merger. This probably derives from

that the employees work assignment is similar to their assignments on the former

organizational constellation. This can be explained through that this merger was a product-

extension merger and that the reason for the two firms to merge is to diversify their supply of

services. Therefore, any major changes in the employees work habits would be irrational

since they should focus on their competences rather than trying to develop new ones. This

implies that the employees do not experience any ambiguity caused by misunderstanding

when working with their day-to-day operations.

5.7 Role conflict

The result indicated that the managers’ capability to take the employees opinions in

consideration is unchanged compared to before the merger. This can be derived from that the

work units from the two firms have been incorporated and the employees’ continues to report

to the same managers as they did before the merger. This is an example of an integration

process which implies interrupting the incumbent company culture, structure, job

arrangements and form new agreements. In this mode, managers’ ability to listen to the

employees opinions regarding the merger may prevent role conflicts from occurring. These

transitions are according to the role conflict theory neither done in a short-term perspective

31

nor made distinctly which makes managerial interventions important to finalize the

transactions between the two organizations.

Role conflict is according to the theory derived by preparation and understanding.

This relationship was tested from the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2: Preparation and understanding are positively correlated to role

conflict during the operational combination stage of a merger.

Preparation and understanding has a positive significant relationship to role conflict

during the operational combination stage in this merger. The degree of role conflict in the

firm is moderate affected by the extent the employees were prepared for the organizational

changes caused by the merger and to which extent they understood the underlying strategic

objectives to merge with the other firm. This implies that a higher degree of

preparations and understanding of the merger generates less role conflict on the work place.

Prior to the merger, the management in both firms needs to prepare the employees’ for the

organizational changes that will occur and establish a deeper understanding for the underlying

objectives of the merger. Therefore, hypothesis 2 is confirmed.

5.8 Efficiency

The result indicates that the employees apprehend that the efficiency in the new firm is

unchanged compared to the situation before the merger. Both when it comes to the general

efficiency in the organization and the efficiency in the decision making process. This can be

explained by the fact that the work assignments for the employees are similar as before the

merger and that they report to managers. Furthermore, the employees believe that their own

workgroups performance has been good since the merger took place. Both of these aspects

indicate that no significant culture clash has occurred during the merger which

would have discouraged an effective work environment.

5.9 Acculturation

The results indicate that the firms’ employees are aware of both the old organizations

core values and the new organizations core values. Further, it explains that the employees

identify themselves with the new core values to the same extent as before the merger. This

can be explained by that the firms’ company cultures have integrated through

the integration process, according to the acculturation theory, which implies that there is some

32

degree of organizational change in both companies. The reason for this is that the employees

from both firms see each other as equals and benefits from separate parts of both

cultures. This can also be an indication for why the employees’ feelings towards the general

work environment at the firm are similar to their feelings for their work environment on the

two separate firms.

However, the open ended question identified that some employees from the relatively

smaller firm are more dissatisfied with the new organizational culture and feel less

appreciated in the new organization. Furthermore, they have also apprehended the new

organization as more result oriented and less caring. This implies that the managers should

have been more thorough when integrating the two firms through interventions and

workshops together with employees’ to create awareness regarding these issues.

The general opinion on how hard work is rewarded is the same as before the

merger which indicates that the companies’ cultures before the merger has been similar in

how they have awarded their employees for the extra hard work effort.

Acculturation is according to the theory derived by efficiency and communication.

This relationship was tested from the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3: Efficiency and communication are positively correlated to

acculturation during the operational combination stage of a merger.

Efficiency and communication has a positive significant relationship to acculturation

during the operational combination stage in this merger. Acculturation is highly affected by

the level of efficiency in the new organization compared to the old organization and is

moderate affected by the communication in the firm. This implies that the management

should take the given opportunity to redistribute for example reporting responsibilities in

order to make the new organization more efficient and therefore increase the level of

acculturation. Therefore, hypothesis 3 is confirmed.

5.10 Employee motivation

The results indicate that the employees’ feel slightly more motivated then prior to the

merger. The organizational changes have made the employees day-to-day operations

somewhat better. Further, the employees work spirit has to some extent increased due to the

merger and they also believe that their co-workers work spirit has slightly increased since the

merger between the two firms.

33

To effectively motivate employees after a merger, managers need to deal with each

person one at a time and ask questions, listening to and working together one-on-one. To

some extent, managers at the professional service firm have helped people to find satisfaction

in their work and therefore increase their motivation. However, the results from the open

ended question have pointed out that the employees’ from the relatively smaller firm and the

administrators feel less motivated which does not accord with the general opinion. That these

minorities feel less motivated may result in that the employees from the relatively larger firm

show higher work effort and persistence in their work and that the gap between the groups

increases.

Employee motivation is according to the theory derived by social identity, role conflict

and acculturation. This relationship was tested from the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4: Social identity, role conflict and acculturation are positively

correlated to employee motivation during the operational combination stage of

a merger.

Social identity, role conflict and acculturation have a positive significant relationship

to employee motivation during the operational combination stage in this merger. Therefore, it

is important for the professional service firm to take those variables into consideration when

formulating future strategies and when trying to improve the organizational climate. This is

because positive employee motivation is widely proven to enhance value for the organization.

The higher degree of social identity, role conflict and acculturation within the firms’

employees’ the higher the employee motivation will be. Therefore, hypothesis 4 is confirmed.

34

6. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION

This paper has examined how employee motivation is affected during the operational

combination stage of a merger between two relatively small Swedish professional service

firms. This was done through a quantitative study conducted by examining the relationship

between employee motivation and three approaches; social identity, role conflict and

acculturation. Those approaches were first by themselves tested in order to examine the

relationship between their respective indicators that represent respective approach.

First, workplace identity and communication has a positive significant relationship to

social identity in this merger. However, relationship is positive correlated to social identity

but is not significant and no assumption can be made. This is particularly interesting since the

merger most likely had different effects on each employee and generated no general opinions

about this.

Second, preparation and understanding has a positive significant relationship to role

conflict in this merger. The degree of role conflict in the firm is moderate affected by the

extent the employees were prepared for the organizational changes caused by the merger and

to which extent they understood the underlying strategic objectives to merge with the other

firm.

Third, efficiency and communication has a positive significant relationship to

acculturation in this merger. Acculturation is highly affected by the level of the new

organizations efficiency compared to the old organization and is moderate affected by the

communication in the firm.

Finally, the main result of this study is that the three approaches have a positive

significant impact on employee motivation. Therefore, it is important for the professional

service firm to take those variables into consideration when formulating future strategies and

when trying to improve the organizational climate.

Furthermore, the questionnaire revealed significant differences in two groups in the

organization, the administrators in the firm and the employees from the relatively smaller firm

of the two in the merger. The administrators are generally less satisfied with the merger,

compared to the other work categories, since they apprehend that their relationship with co-

workers and managers has been affected in a slightly negative way. The employees’ from the

relatively smaller firm feel less appreciated in the new work environment. This has lead to

lower work motivation for these employees. Therefore, the management of the professional

service firm should allocate resources in order to recompose their motivation.

35

However, this does not accord with the general opinion which is that the merger has

had relatively small positive or unchanged effect on the employees on all the investigated

variables.

A limitation of the study is how the questionnaires were formulated since the wrong

coding was used in two indicators that could have been useful but had to be deducted from the

questionnaire. General conclusions cannot be made from this case study, however, other

similar product-extension mergers can apprehend these results as guiding.

Finally, a recommendation for future studies is to conduct a horizontal study in the

same merged company in order to see the changes in employee motivation and if the variables

relationships change over time and during different stages of the merger.

36

7. REFERENCES

Amburgey, T., Miner, A., 1992. Strategic Momentum: The Effects of Repetitive, Positional,

and Contextual Momentum on Merger Activity, Strategic Management Journal, vol:

13 iss: 5 p: 335.

Auster, E., Sirower, M., 2002. The Dynamics of Merger and Acquisition Waves: A Three-

Stage Conceptual Framework with Implications for Practice, Journal of Applied

Behavioral Science, vol: 38 iss: 2 p: 216.

Bastien, D., 1987. Common patterns of behavior and communication in corporate mergers

and acquisitions, Human Resource Management, vol: 26 iss: 1 p: 17.

Berry, J., 1980. Social and cultural change, Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, vol: 5 p:

211, Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Bhal, K., Bhaskar, U., Ratnam, V., 2009. Employee reactions to M&A: Role of LMX and

leader communication, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol: 30 iss:

7 p: 604.

Chatterjee, S., Jamieson, L., Wiseman, F., 1991. Indentifying Most Influential Observations

in Factor Analysis, Marketing Science vol: 10 iss: 2 p: 124.

Cox, E., 1980. The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: a review, Journal of

Marketing Research, vol: 17 iss:4 p: 407.

Elsass, P., Veiga, J., 1994. Acculturation in acquired organizations: A force-field perspective.

Human Relations, vol: 47 iss: 4 p: 431.

Focarino, J., Wu, N., 2009. 2009 M&A activity to be fueled by merger of necessity,

PriceWaterHouseCoopers Outlook.

Guerro, S., 2008. Changes in employees’ attitudes at work following an acquisition: a

comparative study by acquisition type, Human Resource Management Journal, vol:18

iss: 3 p: 216.

Gulati, R., Teo, D., 2008. A study of employee attitueds after mergers and acquisitions: an

Asia-Pacific perspective, Horizons - New perspectives on M&A success.

Hair, J., Anderson, E., Tatham, L., Black, W., 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th edition).

Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall.

Igbaria, M., Guimaraes, T., 1993. Antecedents and consequences of job satisfaction among

information center employees. Journal of Management Information Systems, vol: 15

iss: 2 p: 95.

Katz, D., Khan, R., 1978. The Social Psychology of Organizations, HR Folks International.

Kottak, P., 2005. Cultural Anthropology, New York: McGraw-Hill.

37

Kreisman, B., 2002. Insights into Employee Motivation, Commitment and Retention,

Business Training Experts.

Kruger, D., 2003. Integrating quantitative and qualitative methods in community Research,

The Community Psychologist, 36, p: 18.

Locke, E., Latham, G., 2004. What should we do about motivation theory? Six

recommendations for the twenty-first century, Academy of Management Review, vol:

29 iss: 3 p: 388.

Marks, M., 1999. Adding cultural fit to your diligence checklist. Mergers & Acquisitions, vol:

34 iss: 3 p: 14.

Marks, M., Mirvis, H., 1992. Rebuilding after the merger: Dealing with survival sickness,

Organizational Dynamics, vol: 21 iss: 2 p: 18.

O'Brien, R., 2007, A Caution Regarding Rules of Thumb for Variance Inflation Factors,

Quality and Quantity, vol: 41 iss: 5 p: 673.

Raukko, M., 2009. Organizational commitment during organizational changes: A longitudinal

case study on acquired key employees, Baltic Journal of Management, vol:4 iss: 3 p:

331.

Ried, S., Giles, H., 2005. Intergroup Relations: Its Linguistic and Communicative Parameters,

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, vol 8 iss: 3 p: 211.

Schuler, R., Jackson, S., 2001, HR issues and activities in mergers and acquisitions, European

Management Journal, vol: 19 iss: 3 p: 239.

Seo, M., Hill, S., 2005. Understanding the human side of merger and acquisition: An

integrative framework, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, vol: 41 iss: 4 p:

422.

Sudarsanam, S., 2003. Creating value from mergers and acquisitions: the challenges: an

integrated and international perspective, Pearson Education.

Tajfel, H., Turner, J., 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict, The Social

Psychology of Intergroup Relations, p: 94.

Udechukwu, I., 2009. Correctional Officer Turnover: Of Maslow’s Needs Hierarchy and

Herzberg’s Motivation Theory, Public Personnel Management, vol: 38 iss: 2 p: 69.

Terry, D., O’Brien, T., 2001. Status, legitimacy, and ingroup bias in the context of an

organizational merger, Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, vol: 4, iss:3 271.

Tremblay, M., Blanchard, C., Taylor, S., Pelletier, L., Villeneuve, M., 2009. Work Extrinsic

and Intrinsic Motivation Scale: Its Value for Organizational Psychology Research,

Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, vol: 41 iss: 4 p: 213.

38

Zhou, J., Shin, S., Cannella, A., 2008. Employee Self-Perceived Creativity After Mergers and

Acquisitions: Interactive Effects of Threat Opportunity Perception, Access to

Resources, and Support for Creativity, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, vol: 44

p: 397.

39

APPENDIX 1

TABLE 1 Effects of different sources of problems in different integration stages of merger and acquisitions

Impact of Stressors in Each Phase of M&A Integration

Stressor Underlying Theory Premerger Initial Planning and Formal Combination Operational Combination Stablization

Uncertainty Anxiety theory Medium-large

Large-medium

Small Small

Loss of identity Social identity theory Small Large-medium Medium-small Small

Intergroup conflict Social identity theory Small Medium-large Large-medium Small

Perceived unfairness Organizational justice theory Small Medium-large Medium Medium-small

Acculturation stress Acculturation theory Small Medium Large Medium-small

Job environment changes Job characteristics theory Small Small Medium-large Medium-small

Role conflict and ambigutiy Role conflict theory Small Small Large-medium small

Prolonged uncertainty Anxiety theory Small Small Small-medium Small or high

Source: Seo & Hill (2005)

40

TABLE 2 Underlying theories in understanding the human side of mergers and acquisitions

Underlying Theories Sources of Problems Predicted Outcomes Related Prescriptions

Anxiety theory Uncertainty and anticipated negative impact on career and

job.

Low productivity Top-down communication; social support; participation

in decision making; training managers to empathize

Prolonged anxiety and uncertainty Self-centered behaviors and listen to employees; golden parachutes

Mental and physical illness Ongoing communication; speeding up transition

Lack of motivation

Social identity theory Loss of old identities

(organizational, professional, work group)

Sense of loss, anger, and grief Disengagement efforts (grieving meetings); proactively

assessing strength of existing identities and framing

Interacting with other organization’s members Denial and refusal of change new identities to be more appealing

Intergroup bias and conflict

Acts of noncomliance

Creating a new identity; fostering cross-organizational arrangements

and activities

Acculturation theory Contact with or adjustment to different Acculturative stress and Cultural due diligence; fostering multiculturalism;

organizational culture resistance facilitating intercultural learning; heightening

Interorganizational tension awareness of thinking and behaviors that cause

and conflict culture clash to develop

Culture clash

Role conflict theory Ambiguous and conflicting roles Low productivity Two-way communication; leadership of role

Low job satisfaction clarification

Job characteristics theory Changes in post-M&A job

Environments

Job satisfaction and commitment Post-M&A job redesign; employee involvement in job design;

job transfer training

Absenteeism/turnover

Organizational justice theory Perceived fair treatment of surviving

And displaced employees

Psychological withdrawal

Turnover

Fair and objective human resource management; equal

Participation in decision making; treating employees with dignity and respect

Source: Seo & Hill (2005)

41

APPENDIX 2

TABLE 1 Variables and Questions

Variable Question Type

Q1) Har dina arbetsuppgifter i någon grad förändrats i samband med sammanslagningen? Yes/No

Workplace identity Q2) Min arbetsgrupps status, i jämförelse med andra arbetsgruppers status, är Higher/Neutral/Lower

Q3) Markera det alternativ som du anser bäst stämmer överrens med respektive påstående 7 point likert scale

Understanding Q3.1) Min förståelse för mina arbetsuppgifter har sedan sammanslagningen blivit Where 1 is "Mycket bättre" and 7 is "Mycket sämre"

Communication1 Q3.2) Mina chefers kommunikation med mig har sedan sammanslagningen blivit

Role conflict1 Q3.3) Mina chefers förmåga att ta hänsyn till mina åsikter har sedan sammanslagningen blivit

Efficiency1 Q3.4) Effektiviteten i den nya organisationen har sedan sammanslagningen blivit

Efficiency2 Q3.5) Effektiviteten i beslutsprocessen i organisationen har sedan sammanslagningen blivit


Efficiency3 Q4.2) Jag anser att min arbetsgrupps prestation efter sammanslagningen har varit Where 1 is "Mycket bra" and 7 is "Mycket dåligt"

Preparation Q4.3) Mina chefers arbete med att förbereda mig inför sammanslagningen har varit

Role conflict2 Q5) Gradera de fem följande alternativen beroende på hur viktiga de är för dig Grade alternatives 1 to 5

Lojalitet till mina medarbetare från min tidigare arbetsgivare innan sammanslagningen Where 1 is the most important

Lojalitet till mina klienter från min arbetsgivare innan sammanslagningen

Genomföra de förändringar som sammanslagningen kräver

Lojalitet till mina nya klienter

Lojalitet till mina medarbetare som börjat på arbetsplatsen efter sammanslagningen


Communication2 Q6.1) Jag har full förståelse för vilka orsaker som låg bakom sammanslagningen

Where 1 is "Stämmer helt" and 7 is "Stämmer inte

alls"

42

Social identity1 Q6.2) Jag är beredd att acceptera nya organisationsförändringar och anpassa mig därefter

Social identity2 Q6.3) Jag ser mig själv som en del av den nya organisationen

Role conflict3 Q6.4) Risken att förlora jobbet är större efter sammanslagningen

Acculturation control1 Q7.1) Jag kände till min arbetsgivares ledord innan sammanslagningen Yes/No

Acculturation control2 Q7.2) Jag känner till nya bolagets ledord Yes/No

Q7.3) Markera det alternativ som du anser bäst stämmer överrens med respektive påstående 7 point likert scale

Acculturation1 Q7.3.1) I jämförelse med min arbetsgivare innan sammanslagningen kan jag relatera till nya bolagets ledord Where 1 is "Mycket bättre" and 7 is "Mycket sämre"

Acculturation2

Q7.3.2) I jämförelse med min arbetsgivare innan sammanslagningen uppskattas en arbetsinsats utöver det

vanliga på nya bolaget

Acculturation3

Q7.3.3) I jämförelse med min arbetsgivare innan sammanslagningen tycker jag överlag att arbetsklimatet på

nya bolaget är


Relationship1 Q8.1) Min relation till mina kollegor har sedan sammanslagningen blivit Where 1 is "Mycket bättre" and 7 is "Mycket sämre"

Relationship2 Q8.2) Min relation till mina chefer har sedan sammanslagningen blivit

Relationship3 Q8.3) Mitt förtroende för företagsledningen har sedan sammanslagningen blivit


Employee motivation1 Q9.1) De organisatoriska förändringarna har gjort att mitt vardagliga arbete blivit Where 1 is "Mycket bättre" and 7 is "Mycket sämre"

Employee motivation2 Q9.2) Sammanslagningen har gjort att min inställning till arbetet har blivit

Employee motivation3 Q9.3) Jag uppfattar att sammanslagningen har gjort att mina kollegors inställning till arbetet har blivit

43

APPENDIX 3

Statistical methodology

The statistical methodology that has been employed in this paper is presented in the

following order; Cronbach’s α alpha, factor analysis, Pearsons correlation analysis and finally

multiple regression analysis.

To analyze the collected data and measure the internal consistency of the indicators

received from the questionnaire Cronbach’s α will be used to examine the reliability on those

variables with more than one indicator to see to what extent each question measure the

considered variable. Each variable with more than one indicator will have a α value after the

variable is presented. The value of Cronbach’s α are presumed to present a positive value

between 0 and 1 were the lowest acceptable value is ought to be 0,60 (Hair et al., 1998).

Thenceforth, to complement Cronbach’s α a factor analysis is employed which is a

widely used statistical technique (Chatterjee et al., 1991). The main purpose of the factor

analysis is to identify a relative small number of factors or underlying dimension that can be

used to represent a relationship in a variable. This implies that if one indicator lowers the

significance of one variable it will be deducted from the variable. This is also known as the

Principal Components Analysis (Chatterjee et al., 1991).

Subsequently, the variables with acceptable multiple indicators are transformed into

one new variable by adding the data together and dividing the data with the number of

indicators and hence present the mean of the indicators into a new variable.

In addition, the statistical relationship between the indicators is also tested with

Pearson’s correlation analysis which is a measure of the linear dependence between two

variables, giving a value between +1 and -1 (Chatterjee et al., 1991). This is done to observe

how the indicators correlate with each other. If there is a high correlation between two

variables there might be multicollinearity in the multiple regression, which implies that the

coefficient estimates may change erratically in response to small changes in the model or data.

If this occurs, a Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) test will be done in the multiple regression

analysis to see if the variables have a high correlation with each other within the multiple

regression. If the VIF value is less than 5 it is acceptable (O’Brien, 2007).

Thenceforth, a multiple regression analysis is conducted in order to observe the

statistical relationship between several independent variables and one dependent variable

44

(Chatterjee et al., 1991). The dependent variable in the equations in each equation above is on

the left side of the equal sign and the independent variables are on the right side.

Results

In this Appendix three kinds of tables are presented in order to see the statistical

relationship between the variables, the three tables are; Model Summary, ANOVA and

Coefficients. The more important values for this analysis are the R2, Sig., β and VIF

values.

Before each multiple regression analysis was conducted a Pearsons correlation matrix, see

Appendix 4 table 1, with the transformed variables is analyzed in order to determine if the

relationship between the transformed variables are positive or negative. All significant

correlations show positive linear relationships.

Results for hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 1 assumed that workplace identity, level of communication and

relationship is positive correlated to social identity during the operational combination stage

of a merger. The results from the survey indicate that communication has a positive

significance on social identity (β=0.514; p<0.05) as does workplace identity (β=0,230;

p<0.05). The variables workplace identity, communication and relationship explain 45.1

percent (R2=0.451) of the variance for the variable social identity and the model generally

show high significance, see Sig. table 2. The VIF values are close to 1 which indicates that

there is no tendencies of multicollinearity between the variables (reference value VIF<5).

Social identity = workplace identity + relationship + communication Equation (1)

TABLE 1 Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

dimension0

1 .672a .451 .424 .75881

a. Predictors: (Constant), workplace identity, relationship, communication

TABLE 2 ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 27.957 3 9.319 16.185 .000a

Residual 33.972 59 .576

Total 61.929 62

a. Predictors: (Constant), workplace identity, relationship, communication

b. Dependent Variable: Social identity

45

TABLE 3 Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Collinearity

Statistics

B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF

1 (Constant) -.537 .508 -1.058 .294

Relationship .067 .158 .051 .428 .670 .650 1.539

Communication .479 .114 .514 4.205 .000 .623 1.605

Workplace identity .362 .167 .230 2.162 .035 .822 1.216

a. Dependent Variable: Social identity

´


Hypothesis 2 assumed that preparation and communication is positive correlated to

role conflict during the operational combination stage of a merger. The results from the

survey indicate that preparation is positive correlated and has a high significance on role

conflict (β=0.271; p<0.05) as does understanding (β=0.260; p<0.05). The variables

preparation and understanding explain 17.6 percent (R2=0.176) of the variance for the

variable role conflict and the model generally show a high significance, see Sig. table 5. The

VIF values are close to 1 which indicates that there is no tendencies of multicollinearity

between the variables (reference value VIF<5).

Role conflict = preparation +understanding Equation (2)



dimension0

1 .420a .176 .151 .911

a. Predictors: (Constant), understanding, preparation

TABLE 5 ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 11.379 2 5.689 6.853 .002a

Residual 53.129 64 .830

Total 64.507 66

a. Predictors: (Constant), communication, preparation

b. Dependent Variable: Role conflict

46



Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Collinearity

Statistics

B

Std.

Error Beta Tolerance VIF

1 (Constant) 1.870 .739 2.530 .014

Preparation .174 .075 .271 2.317 .024 .938 1.066

Understanding .418 .188 .260 2.222 .030 .938 1.066

a. Dependent Variable: Role conflict


Hypothesis 3 assumed that efficiency and communication is positive correlated to

acculturation during the operational combination stage of a merger. The results from the

survey indicate that efficiency has a positive significance on acculturation (β=0.418; p<0.05)

as does communication (β=0.287; p<0.05). The variables efficiency and communication

explain 41 percent (R2=0.410) of the variance for the variable acculturation and the model

generally show a high significance, see Sig. table 8. The VIF values are close to 1 which

indicates that there is no tendencies of multicollinearity between the variables (reference

value VIF<5).

Acculturation = efficiency + communication Equation (3)



dimension0

1 .641a .410 .391 .77440

a. Predictors: (Constant), communication, efficiency

TABLE 8 ANOVAb


1 Regression 25.048 2 12.524 20.884 .000a

Residual 35.982 60 .600

Total 61.030 62

a. Predictors: (Constant), communication, efficiency

b. Dependent Variable: Acculturation

47



Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Collinearity Statistics


1 (Constant) 1.778 .375 4.743 .000

Efficiency .421 .130 .418 3.247 .002 .592 1.690

Communication .265 .119 .287 2.223 .030 .592 1.690

a. Dependent Variable: Acculturation


Hypothesis 4 assumed that social identity, role conflict and acculturation are positive

correlated to employee motivation during the operational combination stage of a merger. The

results from the survey indicate that acculturation has a positive significance on employee

motivation (β=0.249; p<0.05) as does social identity (β=0,327; p<0.05) and role conflict

(β=0.271; p<0.05). The variables social identity, role conflict and acculturation explain 40

percent (R2=0.400) of the variance for the variable employee motivation and the model

generally show a high significance, see Sig. table 11. The VIF values are close to 1 which

indicates that there is no tendencies of multicollinearity between the variables (reference

value VIF<5).

Employee motivation = social identity + role conflict + acculturation Equation (4)

TABEL 10 Model Summary


dimension0

1 .632a .400 .369 .78224

a. Predictors: (Constant), role conflict, social identity, acculturation

TABLE 11 ANOVAb


1 Regression 24.057 3 8.019 13.105 .000a

Residual 36.102 59 .612

Total 60.159 62

a. Predictors: (Constant), role conflict, social identity, acculturation

b. Dependent Variable: Employee motivation

48



Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Collinearity Statistics


1 (Constant) .910 .519 1.751 .085

Acculturation .248 .121 .249 2.042 .046 .682 1.466

Social identity .322 .114 .327 2.838 .006 .765 1.307

Role conflict .276 .110 .271 2.507 .015 .868 1.153

a. Dependent Variable: Employee motivation

49

APPENDIX 4

TABLE 1 Pearsons Correlation Matrix

Workplace identity Understanding Role conflict Preparation

Employee motivation Relationship Acculturation Social identity Efficiency Communication

Workplace identity

Correlation 1

Sig. (2-tailed)

Understanding Correlation .265* 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .029

Role conflict Correlation .076 .327** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .538 .006

Preparation Correlation .126 .248* .336** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .311 .043 .005

Emplotee motivation

Correlation .514** .509** .415** .322* 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .001 .010

Relationship Correlation .347** .182 .490** .295* .510** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .005 .153 .000 .019 .000

Acculturation Correlation .174 .157 .364** .489** .506** .590** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .172 .220 .003 .000 .000 .000

Social identity Correlation .451** .363** .162 .422** .492** .428** .484** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .003 .205 .001 .000 .000 .000

Efficiency Correlation .389** .320** .341** .507** .701** .485** .602** .551** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .008 .005 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Communication Correlation .396** .350** .481** .616** .443** .578** .554** .634** .639** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .005 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

how a merger in the operational combination stage affects employee motivation

Documents

Transcript of how a merger in the operational combination stage affects employee motivation