Global Journal of Management and Business Research, A: Administration and Management, Volume 22 Issue 9

e) Job Involvement and Employee Productivity Research objective 2 was to look at the connection between job involvement and employee productivity. This goal was pointed toward deciding if the job involvement factors straightforwardly raise employee productivity. Ha2: There is a significant relationship between job involvement and employee productivity The researcher, in any case, is curious as to whether any relationship exists between job involvement and employee productivity, the independent variable was job involvement while the dependent variable was employee productivity, which were both measured on the ordinal scale variable. Hence, the appropriate quantitative statistical analysis to respond to the stated hypothesis was PLS-SEM path model technique. However, preliminary analyses were conducted to make sure that no violation of the assumption linearity. The result of the PLS-SEM bootstrap disclosed that the Beta value for the connection among job involvement and employee productivity was β = 0.142; p=0.000. However, the values of Beta, T-statistics, and P values for the connection among independent variable (i.e., job involvement) and the dependent variable (i.e. employee productivity) were β = 0.142; t=1990; p< 0.05. Therefore, all the values for such relationships are greater than 1.96 at 0.05 confidence levels using two tail tests (rule of thumb). Substantially, Hypothesis Ha2 was accepted. Moreover, the result means that the degree to which employees are associated with doing their day-to- day work decidedly impacted their productivity in their work environments. Table 4.10 showed the aftereffect of testing the impact of job involvement and employee productivity. Table 4.8: PLS-SEM path model Analysis Result of job Involvement and Employee Productivity Independent Variable Std Beta Std Error T-Value Job Involvement 0.142 0.072 1.990** Source: Field survey Note: **p< 0.05, *p< 0.01 Accordingly, the Table 4.8 showed that there was a correlation among the two tested variables ( β = 0.142; t=1.990; p< 0.05. Consequently, the second alternate Hypothesis was accepted. The result of this study reinforced the direct effect of job involvement on employee productivity. Specifically, such result pointed out that there was positive correlation between the two related variables. In other words, the employees’ strong dependence on involvement in the job will precede them to increase as well as improve productivity for the organizations. f) Feedback and Employee Productivity Research objective 3 of this study was to examine the connection between feedback and employee productivity. The purpose of developing this objective was to find out whether or not the components of feedback directly raise employees’ productivity. Ha3: There is a significant relationship between feedback and employee productivity at different levels of the educational institution The researcher wanted to know if there was existence of any relationship between feedback and employee productivity, the independent variable was feedback while the dependent variable was employee productivity, which were both measured on the ordinal scale variable. Thus, the appropriate statistical test to respond to the hypothesis was PLS-SEM path model coefficient. Primer investigations were performed to guarantee no infringement of the suppositions of linearity. The result for PLS-SEM bootstrap revealed that the Beta worth for the associations among feedback and employee productivity was β = 0.580; p=0.000. Consequently, the results of Beta, T-statistics, and P values for the relations among independent variable (i.e., feedback) and the dependent variable (i.e., employee productivity) were β = 0.580; t=6.637; p< 0.05. To this effect, all the ideals for such associations are above 1.96 at 0.05 confidence levels using two tail tests (rule of thumb). Essentially, Hypothesis Ha3 was accepted. In addition, the result demonstrated the degree to which workers are provided with feedback would facilitate and positively affects their productivity in their place of work. Table 4.9 exhibits the result of testing the effect of feedback on employee productivity. Table 4.9: PLS-SEM Path Model Analysis Result of Feedback and Employee Productivity Independent Variable Std Beta Std Error T-Value Feedback 0.580 0.085 6.637** Source: Field survey Note: **p< 0.05, *p< 0.01 36 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXII Issue IX Version I Year 2022 ( ) A © 2022 Global Journals Mediating Role of Coaching on the Relationship between Compensation Job Involvement and Feedback on Employee Productivity