PAPER IS ALREADY COMPLETED. PLEASE JUST HELP ME ASSEMBLE IT. THANK YOU Check layouts and place all your sections in order. Submit the final draft of your paper, using the guides given you in Part I: F

Get quality term paper help at Use our paper writing services to score better and meet your deadlines. It is simple and straightforward. Whatever paper you need—we will help you write it!

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper


Check layouts and place all your sections in order. Submit the final draft of your paper, using the guides given you in Part I:

Follow this format for assembling your paper using APA guidelines:

Title page



Literature Review


Research Design

Hypothesis (all of them: null, hypothesis, alt. hypothesis

Results and Findings

Discussion of Findings including Study Limitations

Conclusions and Recommendations for further research



  • cover letter (if used)
  • blank data collection instrument (e.g. survey, 1st page of excel spreadsheet screenshot
  • three charts (all on one page ok)

PAPER IS ALREADY COMPLETED. PLEASE JUST HELP ME ASSEMBLE IT. THANK YOU Check layouts and place all your sections in order. Submit the final draft of your paper, using the guides given you in Part I: F
PART ONE   Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0% Intercept 1.597561 0.234974 6.798891 0.000138 1.05571 2.139411 1.05571 2.139411 X Variable 1 -0.14634 0.064674 -2.26274 0.053493 -0.29548 0.002798 -0.29548 0.002798   Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0% Intercept 2.358209 0.634913 3.714221 0.00592 0.894096 3.822322 0.894096 3.822322 X Variable 1 -0.16915 0.176775 -0.95689 0.366641 -0.5768 0.238489 -0.5768 0.238489 PART TWO In the first chart, the p-value is 0.053493, which is lower than the critical value of 0.05. hence the changes in independent variable are significant since it relates with the dependent variable. On the other hand, the second chart p-value is 0.366641, which is greater than 0.05. this shows that the variable is insignificant. Limitations This study’s limitations are its flaws or demerits, resulting from unavailability of resources, small sample size, flawed methodology, among others. The respondents were limited to the educated and employed persons only. The small size could not give enough information to bring out exact findings.
PAPER IS ALREADY COMPLETED. PLEASE JUST HELP ME ASSEMBLE IT. THANK YOU Check layouts and place all your sections in order. Submit the final draft of your paper, using the guides given you in Part I: F
IMFORMED CONSENT: The impact that Covid 19 pandemic has had on primary health care around the U.S. 3/7/2021 Thank you for participating in this research study about [The impact that Covid-19 has had on primary health care around the U.S. This research project is being conducted by Vanessa Garcia, Saint Joseph’s College and is to satisfy the graduation requirements for a research capstone project. The objective of this research project is to find out how health care administrators have been able to cope with the recent pandemic and see what has been their best and worse experiences thus far. There are no known risks if you decide to participate in this research study, nor are there any costs for participating in the study. The information you provide will help me understand. The goal of my research is to obtain personal experiences from different department administrators. This survey is anonymous. If you choose to participate, do not write your name on the questionnaire. No one will be able to identify you. No one will know whether you participated in this study. The information collected for this research is only for this study and remains confidential. Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose to participate, please click the link to take survey. If you have any questions or concerns about completing the questionnaire or about being in this study, you may contact me, Vanessa Garcia, at [email protected] St. Joseph’s College has reviewed my request to conduct this project.  If you have any concerns about your rights in this study, please contact John Sardelis, Associate Chairperson Health Administration Professor, Doctor of Public.Health, M.A.A.A, A.S.A. at 631 687 1493 or Dr. Teresa Tannazzo, Ph.D., Director of Undergraduate Research, at [email protected] or 631.687.2693. Thank you for your time and interest in furthering the cause of research INCOME What is your total HOUSEHOLD income before taxes? Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 or more RACE / ETHNICITY (ASK BOTH) (ask this question and next question together): Are you of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin? No Yes With which racial group do you self-identify? For purposes of this question, persons of Spanish/Hispanic/Latino origin may be of any race. Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Caucasian Bi-racial Other race / do not wish to answer AGE Which is your age group? 18 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 64 years 65 to 74 years 75 and up EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT What is the highest degree or level of education you have completed? Less than high school High school graduate (includes equivalency) Vocational Certification Some college, no degree Associate degree Bachelor’s degree Ph.D. Other professional degrees, e.g., JD, MD, DDS GENDER What is your gender? Female Male Non-binary Prefer not to answer   EMPLOYMENT STATUS  Which of these descriptions best describes your current employment status? Employed full time Employed part-time Unemployed and currently looking for work Unemployed and not currently looking for work Student Retired Homemaker Self-employed Unable to work   What are the health care administrative issues created by the COVID-19 pandemic? Short-staffed Employees being infected with the virus Turnaround times All of the above What is being done to address these issues? Hiring more employees More overtime fore current employees   What is the level of effectiveness of the current approaches to addressing the problem?   What has been the toughest to manage during the COVID 19 pandemic? Work Home life Virtual learning with children (only applies to you if you you’re a parent) Employees Wearing a mask   Have you lost a loved one due to the coronavirus? Yes No And if so, has that changed your attitude on trying to be the best administrator to your employees? Yes No Don’t wish to answer
PAPER IS ALREADY COMPLETED. PLEASE JUST HELP ME ASSEMBLE IT. THANK YOU Check layouts and place all your sections in order. Submit the final draft of your paper, using the guides given you in Part I: F
COVID 19 Pandemic 1 The impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on primary health care around the U.S. is considerable Vanessa Garcia St. Joseph’s College HA 498:  Research in Health Administration May 2021 Abstract In today’s world we are all suffering through this pandemic that has taken the lives of many people all around the world. Primary health care and all health care workers have had their losses whether it be a patient they were caring for or a loved one. This paper examines the essential part of management and how health care managers have been able to deal with day to day at work and at home life. This research shows that during COVID-19, the different changes that had to be made in order to deal with employees and their new normal with this virus. Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Review of the Literature…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2 Hypothesis…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Research Design………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Results/Findings………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Limitations………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Conclusions and Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………….. References……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Appendix I……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Appendix II……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Appendix III……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Introduction The impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on primary health care around the world is considerable. The new corona virus is a highly destructive because of the fact that it has managed to affect the health of people in a large number of ways. The pandemic has dramatically reduced access to primary health care in the majority of companies around the world including developed countries such as the United States and Australia (Halcomb 559). The poor access to health care services can lead to a decrease in the quality of life for millions of people throughout the world. In its turn, the decreased quality of life will impact economic as well as social development in a negative way leading to the spread of complex diseases. The COVID 19 pandemic has presented an international health crisis of a scope not seen in our lifetime. While much attention has been paid to health workers in critical care and acute areas, nurses working outside of hospitals are also significantly affected. This study sought to investigate the experience of nurses working in Australian primary health care during the COVID 19 pandemic. In particular, it sought to understand the implications on their employment status, role, and access to personal protective equipment. (Halcomb, 559). Health care administrators have been challenged throughout this entire COVID 19 pandemic. Hospital administrators have to deal with equipment shortages for patients and health care workers, staffing shortages, and also having to furlough staff and slashing benefits. For my research, I find that showing the age distribution of participants would be one of the ways to show my sample. There are various ways of displaying the “age” data. These include a simple table as illustrated in Table 5.3 and Figure 5.3. (Robson, 2014 p 117). I have age distribution of participants because my research study includes ages of Health Care Administrators and based on their answers it will be interesting to see if the “age” group makes a difference in opinions in regards to health care administrators and how they have “coped” with the pandemic. Has work and home life affected them and their job duties? Has a certain age group lost more loved ones than others?  Review of Literature Covid 19; Hospital admission Hospital admission during the COVID-19 pandemic were at its all time high. The 2019–2020 pandemic Corona-virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has inundated hospital systems globally, as they prepare to accommodate surge of patients requiring advanced levels of care. (Gupta, Federman,2020). Pandemic preparedness has not been this urgently and widely needed in the last several decades. According to epidemiological predictions, the peak of this pandemic has still not been reached, and hospitals everywhere need to ensure readiness to care for more patients than they usually do, and safety for health care workers who strive to save lives. We share our hospital-wide rapid preparedness and response to COVID-19 to help provide information to other health care systems globally. (Gupta, Federman, 2020). Within three months from the first diagnosed case of COVID-19 in the U.S.A. in late January 2020, the number of SARS-CoV2-infected individuals in the U.S.A. is close to a million, and the number of casualties has surpassed 45,000 [1]. Globally, SARS-CoV2 has infected millions, with an overall case fatality rate of >6.5% [1]. As rapid testing becomes more readily available in the next few weeks, it is expected that many more cases will be diagnosed, and many of them would need hospitalization for care. (Gupta & Federman, 2020). COVID-19; Disruptive affects and improvements. The COVID-19 pandemic has seen health and medical research promoted as countries establish resilient health systems and rapidly responsive prevention, detection, and treatment methods. However, the pandemic will probably negatively affect the capacity and outcomes of the health and medical research sector itself. Research Australia is a national alliance of health and medical research stakeholders. In May, 2020, all members on Research Australia’s contact list were invited to participate in, and share with colleagues, a 10 min online survey. The questionnaire contained 52 questions about research and employment and perceptions of the effect of the pandemic on researchers’ activities (Deakin Human Research Ethics Committee project number HEAG-H-71_2020). (Gupta, Federman, 2020). Data were analyzed with the use of descriptive statistics and logistic regression. 1212 members responded, with most of the responses from researchers in the university sector (79·4%), who are early in their career (41·7%), working full time (70·9%), and in permanent positions (38·1%; appendix). Overall, 79·6% of participants indicated that their research was affected by the pandemic, with a further 9·7% of participants indicating that it was likely to be affected in the future. (Peeters, 2002). Although COVID 19 has spread over 200 countries, and has taken the lives of over 300,000 people, lets look at the facts. Human crisis like COVID-19 pandemic has also offered some unique opportunities for the health care sector. It has allowed us to revisit the health care delivery. Rationalizing and optimizing the available resources during such crisis are some of the most import lessons learned from this crisis. Although, there has been severe disruption in the health care delivery during this time globally, but several positives have also come out of it viz., the effective use of telemedicine, importance of personal hygiene, and the importance of infection control. (Brunier,2020). The virtual means of teaching, educating, and sharing knowledge has now become popular and acceptable. The research and publications have also seen a significant rise during these difficult times. COVID 19; Physical and mental impacts The physical and mental impacts COVID-19 had on essential workers is nothing short of what is called a disaster. A systematic literature search was conducted using two databases: PubMed and Google Scholar. We found 154 studies, and out of which 10 met our criteria. We collected information on the date of publication, first author’s country, the title of the article, study design, study population, intervention and outcome, and key findings, and divided all research articles into two domains: physical and mental health impact. (Shaukat, 2020). Our findings identified the following risk factors for COVID-19-related health impact: working in a high-risk department, diagnosed family member, inadequate hand hygiene, suboptimal hand hygiene before and after contact with patients, improper PPE use, close contact with patients (≥ 12 times/day), long daily contact hours (≥ 15 h), and unprotected exposure. (Shaukat, 2020). The most common symptoms identified amongst HCWs were fever (85%), cough (70%), and weakness (70%). Prolonged PPE usage led to cutaneous manifestations and skin damage (97%), with the nasal bridge (83%) most commonly affected site. HCWs experienced high levels of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and distress. Female HCWs and nurses were disproportionately affected. (Shaukat, 2020) The frontline health care workers are at risk of physical and mental consequences directly as the result of providing care to patients with COVID-19. Even though there are few intervention studies, early data suggest implementation strategies to reduce the chances of infections, shorter shift lengths, and mechanisms for mental health support could reduce the morbidity and mortality amongst HCWs. (Shaukat, 2020). Hypothesis H1. Research Design This study will focus on fixed research by quantitative design by survey. According to Robson; “Survey involves collecting data from groups of participants on a range of variables typically using questionnaires”, (Robson, 2014, p. 30). This study will research how COVID 19 has impacted primary health care around the U.S. In this study it will incorporate data from twenty participants that will be obtained through quantitative design by survey. Collective data will be analyzed and shared. This study will use explanation design in which questions will be derived from data by survey. Quantitative research is based on collective data that can be quantified by numbers or can be converted into numbers, (Robson, 2014, p. 109). Quantitative designs can access a larger population by survey method and is used to verify if a hypothesis is correct. Quantitative designs can also change and manipulate data based on what is being studied. The hypothesis that will be proven during this study is; how Corona-virus has impacted health care around the U.S., and how health care administrators have been affected. Results/Findings Corona-virus is now the talk of the year and due to the pandemic, which has taken the lives of over 207,000, thousand people. Many people think that the Corona-virus was man-made and others think that it originated from Wuhan, China. Scientists first identified a human Corona-virus in 1965. It caused a common cold. Later that decade, researchers found a group of similar human and animal viruses and named them after their crown-like appearance. (WebMD,2020). This theory cannot be explained, and scientists and professionals are still trying to come up a vaccine for this virus. People have failed to notice that this pandemic is not going anywhere anytime soon. If this continues, and it is believed that Corona-virus was man-made, we’ll never understand the larger question, which is why? By rethinking our approach and following the CDC guidelines we can potentially fix the issue and get rid of Corona-virus once and for all. I would like to find out more information on the following questions: What are the health care issues created by the COVID-19 pandemic? What is being done to address these issues? What is the level of effectiveness of the current approaches to addressing the problem? What are the consequences in case the issues are not properly addressed for both patients and health care organizations? How can the COVID-19 pandemic transform the process of providing primary health care in the United States? Interpretation of Findings My theory is unsupported, as well as the written and discussed substance of the project report cannot be demonstrated either by evidence presented(Spoorthy, 2020). Every one of the participants expressed their opinion upon this corona virus, the problems and issues which arose with the impending disease outbreak, the problems brought to them through the disease outbreak, like death of a loved, working remotely, Worked from home due to closings, children’s learning being interrupted(Spoorthy, 2020) due to school closures, the increasing living costs due to modern and irregular living norms, such as the wearing of masks, as well as an increase in taxation, resulting in wage reduction, from attached document showing the data of comparison between both the men and women sample of 10 people in diverse fields of study and varying levels of studies achieved(Spoorthy, 2020). It should be remembered that disease has harmful consequences for individuals or beings who are at greater risk of acquiring the virus, despite the government’s stringent control and preventative methods imposed on the World Health Organization’s recommendations to minimize transmission saving livelihood(Spoorthy, 2020). The thesis below will explain and where necessary explain what is justifiable about the global pandemic, Corona Virus: with reference to World Health Organization and the Covid -19 response team(Spoorthy, 2020). health care issues created by the COVID-19 pandemic The hypothesis will be addressed in the succeeding sections and include, interruption of health programs, disruption of management and cure of non-communicable diseases ( NCDs), social stigma, panic, alienation, death, and reduced income, as well as how the disease outbreak has produced health care problems(Boyle, 2020). First, as per a WHO study released on October 10, 2020, psychological health care systems are being disrupted in most countries around the globe even as demand for cognitive health treatment grows(Boyle, 2020). COVID-19 has a detrimental effect on access to mental health services, as shown by global survey results from 130 nations, underscoring the immediate need for adequate funding. According to the WHO, nations were investing less of their public health care budgets on mental well-being prior to the disease outbreak, and were unable to meet the demands of their citizens(Boyle, 2020). Countries would then raise funding to address the problems that have arisen as a result of the corona virus’s spread. Second, when the COVID-19 outbreak started, diagnosis and care programs for non-communicable diseases ( NCDs) were seriously disrupted, as shown in a WHO survey conducted by 155 countries over a three-week period in May, which indicated that the effect is global, with developing countries being the hardest hit. This is a serious situation because people who live with non-communicable diseases are at risk(Boyle, et.al2020). According to Dr.Tedros, and Director-General of the World Health Organization(Boyle, 2020). “Many people who need treatment for diseases like cancer, cardiovascular disease and diabetes have not been receiving the health services and medicines they need since the COVID-19 pandemic began(Boyle, 2020). It’s vital that countries find innovative ways to ensure that essential services for NCDs continue, even as they fight COVID-19.” Death, loneliness, lack of income, and anxiety may all cause or exacerbate mental health problems(Boyle, 2020). Many individuals may be experiencing a rise in alcohol and drug use, as well as anxiety and depression. COVID-19, on the other hand, can cause neurological and mental problems like delirium, anxiety, and stroke(Boyle, 2020). People who have an emotional, neurological(Boyle, 2020), or substance-abusing condition. More vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection, they may stand a higher risk of severe outcomes and even death.  Limitations Conclusions and Recommendations The covid-19 pandemic has had a significantly negative impact on primary health care in the United States. Americans have been affected by the virus and have experienced deaths resulting from the virus. The mental health problem among the majority of the population has risen. The group that has been affected the most is the youth. The health care system has seen a shortage in personnel supply due to few qualified health practitioners. The health care administration has been directly exposed to the threat of contracting the virus. However, their salary has not experienced any increment due to the economic recess brought upon the country by the virus. Although the study had some flaws, it generated the general idea of how the pandemic has impacted the health care system and the health care administration in the U.S. To further research this topic a larger random sample size should be surveyed. Respondent’s should be from different hospitals in different locations. References Bhargava, H. (2020, April 15). Corona-virus History: How did Corona-virus start? Retrieved October 01, 2020, from Chen, Shu-ching, Lai, Yeur-Hur and Shiow-Luan Tsay. “Nursing Perspectives on the Impacts of Covid 19.” The Journal of Nursing Research 28.3 (2020): 85. David Blumenthal, M.D., M.P.P., Elizabeth J. Fowler, Ph.D., J.D., Melinda Abrams, M.S., and Sara R. Collins, Ph.D. “Covid-19-Implications for Health Care System.” The New England Journal of Medicine 383 (2020): 1483-1488. Donthu, Naveen and Anders Gustafsson. “Effects of COVID-19 on business and research.” Journal of Business Research 17 (2020): 284-289. Grégoire Mercier, Caroline Arquizan, Francois Roubille. “Understanding the effects of Covid 19 on Health care and systems.” The Lancet Public Health 5.10 (2020): 524. Gupta, Shaili and Daniel G. Federman. “Hospital preparedness for COVID-19 pandemic: experience from department of medicine at Veterans Affairs Connecticut health care System.” Taylor & Francis Public Health Emergency Collection 132.6 (2020): 489-494. Halcomb, Elizabeth, et al. “The Experiences of Primary health care Nurses During the COVID‐19 Pandemic in Australia.” Journal of Nursing Scholarship 52.5 (2020): 553-563. Iyengar, Karthikeyan, et al. “Learning opportunities from COVID-19 and future effects on health care system.” Elsevier Public Health Emergency Collection 14.5 (2020): 943-946. Peeters, Anna, et al. “Covid-19’s impact on Australia’s health research workforce.” The Lancet Regional Health 396.10249 (2020): 461. Peiffer-Smadja, N., et al. “Challenges and issues about organizing a hospital to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak: experience from a French reference centre.” Elsevier Public Health Emergency Collection 26.6 (2020): 669-672. Robson, C. (2014). How to do a research project: a guide for undergraduate students. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Shaukat, Natasha, Daniyal Mansoor Ali and Junaid Razzak. “Physical and mental health impacts of COVID-19 on health care workers: a scoping review.” International Journal of Emergency Medicine 13.40 (2020). Tuttle, Katherine R. “Impact of the Covid 19 pandemic on clinical research.” Nature Reviews Nephrology 16 (2020): 562-564.
PAPER IS ALREADY COMPLETED. PLEASE JUST HELP ME ASSEMBLE IT. THANK YOU Check layouts and place all your sections in order. Submit the final draft of your paper, using the guides given you in Part I: F

PAPER IS ALREADY COMPLETED. PLEASE JUST HELP ME ASSEMBLE IT. THANK YOU Check layouts and place all your sections in order. Submit the final draft of your paper, using the guides given you in Part I: F
Employee Job Satisfaction 2 The Effects of Employer Recognition and Reward Programs on Employee Job Satisfaction and Motivation Any Student BUS 498 SAP01 Professor M. Regensburg May 2011 Abstract In today’s economy management must consider the best and most affordable way to encourage employee retention and job satisfaction. There are differing viewpoints regarding recognition versus the more traditional monetary rewards. This paper examines the essential part management plays in administering a successful reward program. The research compares the effectiveness of recognition and traditional reward programs and the correlation between recognition and rewards with job satisfaction. Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Review of the Literature…………………………………………………………………… 2 Hypothesis………………………………………………………………………………… 12 Research Design……………………………………………………………………………13 Results/Findings……………………………………………………………………………16 Limitations………………………………………………………………………………… 31 Conclusions and Recommendations……………………………………………………… 33 References………………………………………………………………………………… 35 Appendix I………………………………………………………………………………… 37 Appendix II………………………………………………………………………………… 38 Appendix III……………………………………………………………………………… 45 Introduction Employees are an organization’s greatest assets. Like any asset people appreciate when managed appropriately. Companies that offer sound reward programs align their own best interest with doing what is best for the business and their employees (Rosalie 2005, p.33). It is important, in today’s economy, to be able to maintain and motivate employees who contribute to the continued success of the business. A properly administered reward program can be a useful tool for retention and motivation and creates job satisfaction. Research has found employees of all levels and ages respond positively to different types of rewards. Spitzer (1996) claims it begins with the fact that all human beings have a high degree of self-motivation, but they also need some external motivation as well (p.46) As Greek playwright Euripides said “In every work, a reward added makes the pleasure twice as great” (as cited in Spitzer, 1996, p. 46). However, knowing that employees respond to motivation raises the question of which type of reward is more beneficial as well as which is more cost effective. The researcher became interested in how recognition and rewards affect employee’s job satisfaction which is believed to affect productivity, employee retention and morale. This research was done to see if there was a relationship between the amount or type of recognition an employee receives and the satisfaction that is felt at the place of employment. Also, of interest was whether there was a correlation between job satisfaction and variables including levels of employment, education, salary, and gender. Do Recognition and Reward Programs Have an Impact on Job Satisfaction and Motivation? A Review of the Literature Employees are an organization’s greatest assets. Like any asset people increase in value to their employer when managed appropriately. Companies that offer sound reward programs align their own best interest with doing what is best for the business and their employees (Rosalie 2005, p.33). It is important, in today’s economy, to be able to maintain and motivate employees who contribute to the continued success of the business. A properly administered reward program can be a useful tool for retention and motivation. Research has found employees of all levels and ages respond positively to different types of rewards. Spitzer (1996) claims it begins with the fact that all human beings have a high degree of self-motivation, but they also need some external motivation as well (p.46) As Greek playwright Euripides said “In every work, a reward added makes the pleasure twice as great” (as cited in Spitzer, 1996, p. 46). However, knowing that employees respond to motivation raises the question of which type of reward is more beneficial as well as which is more cost effective. The Symbiotic Relations of Rewards A reward is defined as something that is a stimulus used to reinforce a desired response (Merriman-Webster). There are traditional rewards which focus on using monetary incentives and there are more innovative rewards that use intrinsic motivation to develop employee productivity, commitment, and retention. Employers need to bring together learnings from the disciplines of economics, psychology, and business management and those analytical approaches will bring a new science to the management of people and lead to better decisions around people issues, including reward strategy. This will help link employee practices and behavior to workforce and business outcomes, establishing the return of specific workforce investments (Gross & Friedman, 2004, pg.11). According to McMullen, Stark and Jensen (2007) employee compensation is one of a company’s largest expenses and companies need to begin to think about whether compensation is an expense or an investment (p.17). From a financial standpoint companies should use a ROI, a return on investment program to analyze their reward programs. Analyzing a company’s reward program is one way for a company to know if they are utilizing a cost-effective means to motivate and retain its employees. Rosalie (2005) found that with reward for value research there are two important facts that employers need to remember not to overlook: pay is not all that matters to employees and performance is about creating value not just about increasing the numbers. A reward program should align what is best for the employee along with what is best for the business (p.33). Only 20% of businesses are using any type of program that will show whether they are utilizing a reward system that is cost effective (McMullen et al, p.18). Rewards may be used as a tool to help retain employees. There is substantial cost associated with replacing employees and training their replacements. In today’s economy it is an added expense that may be avoided if employees are engaged and develop a relationship with the organization. Early engagement is considered a new rubric for rewards and recognition programs. There are some who believe that motivation is what someone tries to do to someone else, but engagement is what a person does themselves (Birchfield, 2010, para.5). Employers are not retaining workers age 20 to 24 and employers are hoping that early engagement will reverse the trend. Testa (2008), conducted research that showed that 10% of younger employees are leaving companies within 2 years, 13% within 23 months and 50% in less than a year (para. 2). Pepsi-America has been experimenting with early engagement and has seen positive results. Additional studies done by Tulgan (2009) show that there is a difference in managing and motivating younger employees, especially those that are part of Generation Y. He found that employees who fall into that age group like to compete against themselves and are motivated by knowing that someone is keeping track and measuring their performance. Those employees ask about traditional rewards more to let employers think they care about the reward system when they hope by doing so they will get everything they can out of the system (p.52). Employee motivation is not just a generational concern. Mirowsky and Ross (1996) researched how men and women view interpersonal work rewards and economic rewards. They were looking for a correlation as to why women historically work for lower wages than man. They found that there is no reason to think that women choose low-paying jobs to get noneconomic benefits that they value more. According to data collected for a General Social Survey, Rowe and Snizek (1995) men and woman rank work values in identical order of preference: feeling of accomplishment, income, change for advancement, job security, and short working hours (most to least preferred) (p.26). Motivation, Communication and Culture According to Maccoby (2010) there are the four R’s that leaders can use to help motivate employees. The four R’s are relationships, rewards, recognition, and reason. Management should focus on strengthening intrinsic motivation of team members using them. Relationships between team members and leaders should be supportive, rewards should be given when the team performs well, recognition should be given to everyone and teams should know the reasons to work harder and how it will serve the organization. Maccoby found that reason can be one of the most powerful motivators. If employees believe in the good of what they are working for they can be motivated to do even repetitive and mundane tasks (p.60). There are also four essential ingredients that recognition should contain. Recognition should be specific about what is being praised, acknowledge the effort the employee has put into the project and its outcome, state the impact the employee’s action has had on the business, and underline how the action has affected you personally (Leyes, 2006, p.80). During difficult economic times employees are being asked for greater commitment to work and money alone may not always be a fair exchange for what is being asked of them. Since the 1940’s research has shown that recognition is at the top of the employee wish list which shows that regardless of the date or economy employee needs are not any different today than they were 60 years ago. A recognition program may be informal and imaginative such as the one used by the California Public Employee’s System and it is a rock that was to symbolize “rock solid” employees and the rocks that hold the company steadfast to accomplish their mission (Slater, 1999, para.18). Jeremy Miller (2006) agrees on the importance of employees being recognized and having a feeling of accomplishment. Miller concluded with his research that it is essential that employees identify with a cause or mission within an organization. He labeled this concept psychic income. The name may be unique, but it is essentially employee recognition and feelings of accomplishment. It is considered one of the least expensive yet most rewarding forms of reward a company can offer its employees and has no monetary value. Psychic income is the satisfaction that employees get from the work they do, the customers they help, and the recognition they get (p.47). Miller uses the not for profit employees as examples. Generally, in the not for profit sector employees are paid substantially below competitive market rates. Those employees may be attracted to a specific cause or help a specific group. In the private sector there may not be that specific cause and employers need to develop an interest or purpose that employees can identify with and work towards. Most research agrees that an important step to take in establishing a reward or recognition program is to build a culture of appreciation. It has been found that there are advantages to building a culture in which there are groups instead of individual stars. The tendency in many organizations is to reward individual performance but many challenges businesses face today can only be solved by groups working together. Ryan (2010) asserts that group accomplishment can be greater and more meaningful than personal achievements because of the relationships that are built and the larger scope of the outcome (para.9). Starbucks coffee is an example of a company that has built a culture where its employees feel they are part of the Starbucks family and are aware of the company’s mission which is to provide its customers with a gourmet beverage in a relaxed atmosphere. Many of the Starbuck employees are lower paid employees but they feel a connection and can easily relate to the company’s goals and in turn work together for that common goal (Miller, 2006, para.4). The employees are not performing only for the money but also to be part of a family working on achieving a specific outcome. According to Cromie (2008) the Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For, all have length of service awards focused on culture and what makes the organization special. Those companies put less attention on individual practices, the longevity of awards, or the type of recognition. They focus more on the total experience within the organization (p. 26). Leadership and open communication are important parts of a reward program and its success. A lack of communication and interaction between management and employees can create a void that can undermine employee engagement. McMullen, Stark and Jensen (2007) believe communication can make or break a reward program (p. 18). Management needs open communication and to develop trust in management. The organization and peers both need to create the feeling of family and an alliance to each other. To create a cohesive group requires strong leadership and the management must be role models. It is found that one-on-one meetings between staff and leaders are very motivating and make employees feel valued especially during difficult economic times (Dewhurst et al., 2010, para. 6). It is management who play the primary role in designing an organization and the jobs that comprise it. Managers take the lead in planning, coaching, and assessing employee performance and linking it to reward outcomes. It is the managers who communicate the nature and relevance of reward programs to employees. (McMullen et al, p. 16). Ryan (2010) states that a good communicator expresses appreciation with a positive attitude. He believes that leaders who are positive can cultivate positivity in others and that people who think more positively are more self-aware and innovative which are desired traits for productive employees to have (para.3). Traditional, Intrinsic Rewards and Total Rewards Rewards that can be successful are both monetary, and non-monetary and do not necessarily increase somebody’s base wages. Money is not the only thing that attracts and retains employees. The research however shows that there are varying opinions on what is more successful in motivating and retaining employees: traditional rewards or intrinsic rewards. Today organizations have a broader understanding of rewards and acknowledge the important role reward programs play in achieving business goals (Gross & Friedman, 2004, p.7). The three highest rated financial incentives are cash bonuses, increased base pay and stock options. (Dewhurst et al, p. 12). 71% of employees leave a job because of salary which signifies the importance of financial incentives (Harris, 2007, p. 71) Harris examined cash rewards for top nonexecutive performers and how to reward work that showed measurable improved corporate performance to both attract new talent or to motivate top performers. He believes that merit reward programs are something that companies should take advantage of but need to learn to use properly. That opinion is shared by Michael Connelly the Vice President of Excel Energy who agrees that employees understand that executives are going to be paid more but they also respond well when they see a company be consistent and if you are going to give merit raises and add to fixed costs it should be done well. (as cited by Harris, p. 72). The use of various cash rewards and bonuses are steadily increasing. A World-at-Work study found that employers’ use of variable pay jumped from 68% in 2002 to 77% in 2004 (Carlson, 2004, para.3). Variable pay includes planned awards and bonuses to reward good performance. Numerous studies have concluded that for people with satisfactory salaries, some non-financial motivators are more effective than extra cash in building long term employee engagement in most sectors, job functions and business contexts. Remuneration packages loaded with bonuses have been known to encourage behavior that may not be good for business or ethics (Birchfield,2010, p. 28) Research and author Daniel Pink found that more money can end in worse performance from an employee and what employees respond to best is intrinsic motivation which is a demonstration of appreciation or more autonomy to master their work (as cited by Daly, 2010, p. 8). As part of Pink’s research people played three games offering high, medium, and low cash rewards. Most people playing the low and moderate games did well, but the people playing in the highest financial reward game did the most poorly (p.8). One reason that companies do not use noncash incentives to their advantage is because of the time and commitment it takes to train leadership. Only 40% of employers are focusing on using nonfinancial rewards.(Shepherd, 2010, para.1). A McKinsey survey suggests that many executives hesitate to challenge the traditional management wisdom that money is what really counts (Birchfield, 2010, p.28). These differing opinions lead to trying to find a common thread that will tie different types of rewards into one program that satisfies all needs. One such program may be a total reward program. According to Hiles (2009) total reward strategy or program “is a focused game plan that allocates resources and tailors activities to achieve a target performance level within a prescribed time table. It must be unique to the organization that develops it and, when done effectively, will help drive sustainable, competitive advantage in the ever-tightening market for key talent by considering the full list of potential of sources of value to employees” (p. 44). A total reward strategy is different than a total rewards mission or philosophy statement which is why the organization offers employee reward programs. Hiles uses a comparison of employees being the consumer of a product (reward plan) and that they assign value to the product. The comparison compares the differences between the two in that the maker of the product (the organization) needs to make sure the products work well together (p. 46). Compensation, benefit, and health plans fall into this category. A total reward strategy should go beyond economics and look at what are potential sources of value to their employees. Employee groups differ significantly in what matters most. There is a difference based on age groups, pay levels, opportunity for promotion, the local labor market, diversity, and geography (p. 47) The strategy an organization develops should be one that is unique to the organization and one that creates an acceptable balance for all of the workforce and still be able to drive optimal efficiency and give the company a competitive edge. Rewards will not make a difference in employee retention unless employees know they exist and understand their full value. A total reward strategy should communicate benefit, career growth and opportunities. Employees want to be shown evidence not just their base pay but all forms of compensation including direct and indirect payments. U.S. employers have been early adapters using total reward statements to promote attraction and retention. Surveys conducted by Aon Consulting shows that 45% of U.S. employers are providing statements online (6%), in print (32%) or in both formats (7%) and another 34% are considering their use (Smolkin,2007, para. 3). Total reward statements are a valuable communication tool that is personalized for each employee. It helps employees understand and review the total value of their programs including pay, benefits, and work-life. In 2006 Boeing joined the growing number of companies that give their employees full access to their compensation and benefits information from pension plans to health insurance and child care referral services. They wanted engaged employees, and did not want them to worry about their health or financial future (Robb, 2007, p. 93). Many employers are finding by giving their employees direct access to that type of information enhances the company’s standing to the employee. It is also seen to demonstrate a company’s value to employees. Wal-Mart is another company that provides their employees with total reward statements. Their statements address career opportunities and how the company contributes to the community and the environment. Employees are reminded about how their opinions can be heard. Eventually they would like to customize their statements so that they specifically identify career paths open to employees in each job category (Smolkin,2007, p. 38). It is not only large employers such as Boeing and Wal-Mart that are faced with the decision about how to retain employees and provide them with the right rewards for a job well done. All companies need to look more closely to see what type of reward program most effective program for the organization and within those will be. The evidence seems to indicate that nonfinancial recognition is something more companies should practice. Employees want to know that they are doing a job that is appreciated and recognized. Recognition is not costly and could be a beneficial tool to promote loyalty and retention during both strong and weak economic times. As the economy improves it will be interesting to see if companies reintroduce financial bonuses or continue to look at creative and less costly reward programs. However, further research still needs to be done to see if either intrinsic or traditional rewards are more effective for retention and motivation. Hypothesis H1.Employees that are shown recognition and appreciation by employers will have more job satisfaction than employees who do not receive recognition and appreciation by employers. Alt. Employees that are not shown recognition and appreciation by employers will have more job satisfaction than employees who receive recognition and appreciation by employers. Null. Recognition and appreciation by employers have no effect on employee job satisfaction Research Design To further understand the correlation between job satisfaction and rewards and recognition a quantitative descriptive study was done. A descriptive quantitative study enabled the researcher to measure how respondents felt about rewards and overall job satisfaction. The research involved collecting numbers which allowed the researcher to do unobtrusive statistical analysis on employees and rewards and variables that affect overall job satisfaction. The target population was people who were employed, and the sampling frame was employees in education and civil service fields. Those surveyed were initially part of a convenience nonrandom sample made up of full-time employees that the researcher had access to through an association with Saint Joseph’s College and Nassau County Correctional Center. Additional survey participants were included through snowballing when several participants offered additional email addresses and in turn those participants also provided more names which broadened the sampling frame to include employees in the private sector. An eighteen-question survey was developed for this study and was used to collect primary data. The survey’s reliability and validity were pretested in a research seminar class and feedback from students was used to adjust and correct the survey questions before distribution. The survey questions were entered into Survey Monkey which allowed the researcher to choose an appropriate layout and design that would be easy to understand. Options were available to select the best way to position the questions and response answers. The questions were put into different categories and respondents were required to change to different categories to go onto the next set of questions. The survey was six pages long and had four-page categories including Employment Information, Employer Programs, Job Satisfaction, and Demographics. The survey was taken and timed to ensure that it would not take too long, and the questions were not confusing or leading An introductory letter preceded the survey. The letter explained the purpose of the survey. Any information obtained would be confidential and anonymous and used only for a project that was a graduation requirement for a St. Joseph college student. Participants were told to expect an email within two days from Survey Monkey. The email would include a link to the actual survey. Survey Monkey allowed the researcher to schedule a specific day and time to have the survey sent out. The survey was sent out on a Sunday that enabled participants to answer the questions from their home computers or if a work email address were provided. They would receive the email early in the week lessening the chance of the survey being buried in a mass of weekday business emails. This approach had a positive result. Most surveys were completed and returned within three days of delivery. A second email was sent as a reminder to complete the survey. After two weeks the survey was closed. Eighty-eight people responded to the survey out of one hundred and twenty-four and seventy-seven or 87.5% of the respondents fully completed the survey resulting in a 62% overall return rate. Through Survey Monkey all results were analyzed and charts were made. Besides, filters were used to cross reference different variables to see how they affected some outcomes. When compiling and analyzing responses a filter was set up. The responses of the seventy-seven completed surveys were used. Additional filters were also produced to narrow down some of the general responses. Those filters were used to find out precisely the following: What level of employee is most satisfied with their job? What income level was most satisfied with their job? What level employee has received recognition? Results The first section of the survey was on employment information. Question 1 asked respondents in what sector they were employed . The breakdown is as shown below. SECTOR EMPLOYED IN Education 33.8% Government 35.1% Not For Profit 1.3% Private Business 27.3% Other 2.6% The three respondents who replied to other wrote in comments that they were employed in the retail, trade, or utility businesses. Question 2 asked respondents what their role at work was and if they were in a supervisory position. WWhen filtered with the question that asked about job satisfaction. This question showed that those at a higher managerial level showed increased job satisfaction. LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY Nonsupervisory 62.3% First Level Supervisor 7.8% Middle Management 24.7% Upper Management 5.2% The purpose of Question 3 was to find out how many years respondents had been at their current place of employment. When analyzing this information and a filter that matched it to job satisfaction, employees who had been at their place of employment for more years had increased job satisfaction. NUMBER OF YEARS AT CURRENT EMPLOYER Less than 2 years 9.1% 2 to 7 years 26.0% 8 to 12 years 14.3% 13 to 20 years 16.9% More than 20 years 33.8% The second section of the survey was on employer programs. A drop-down menu directed respondents to this next section. Section two consisted of six questions about incentives and reward programs and recognition at their current employment place. Question 1 asked whether current employers offered incentives (bonuses or other monetary incentives). There were no surprises with the answers to that question. During economic slow times employers have been forced to cut back on monetary incentives and bonuses. DOES YOUR EMPLOYER OFFER INCENTIVES? Yes 31.2% No 67.5% Not sure 1.3% Question 2 was asked to see if employees were given any recognition for special achievements. 54.5% said yes, 36.4% answered no, and 9.1% were not sure. The researcher found this information to be a significant findinga cost-, especially since past research has shown that recognition is considered a cost-effective method of motivating and retaining employees. Going forward retention of employees under the age 25 is something that should be a concern to employers. 50% of employees in that age group leave their employment places in less than a year, 13% within 23 months, and 10% by the 2-year mark (Testa, 2008, para.2). IS THERE SPECIAL RECOGNITION FOR ACHIEVEMENT AT YOUR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT? Yes 54.5% No 36.4% Not Sure 9.1% Question 3 was one that offered no surprise answer. Respondents were asked whether they believed recognition was important and 96.1% replied yes and only 1.13% said no. 2.0% were not sure. IS RECOGNITION IMPORTANT? Yes 96.1% No 1.3% Not Sure 2.0% Question 4 respondents were asked to rate the importance of different rewards or incentives. Health insurance and salary both were rated as very important by almost an equal number of respondents. Surprisingly vacation was third and was rated higher than advancement opportunities and bonuses. Question 5 asked what type(s) of incentives respondents had received at their current place of employment. On this question respondents could select all that applied. INCENTIVES RECEIVED Cash Bonuses 23.9% Extra Time Off 15.9% Special Monetary Value Award 22.7% None 56.8% Other 5.7% The respondents who answered other had been rewarded with stock options, service awards, pay with promotion, and trips. Question 6 was like Question 5 in that it asked respondents which type of recognition they received as opposed to incentives. It appears that this question may have confused some respondents in that answers included rewards with a monetary value. The seven respondents that answered other had gotten recognition in the form of bonuses, certificates, verbal recognition in front of others, and years of service awards. TYPES OF RECOGNITION RECEIVED Advancement Opportunity 31.2% Service Awards 33.8% None 39.0% Other 9.1% The third section of the survey focused on job satisfaction. Question 1 asked respondents to select the best response for how satisfied they were for recognition they received for their work. LEVEL OF SATISFACTION FOR RECOGNITION RECEIVED Always 7.8% Mostly 35.1% Sometimes 19.5% Rarely 26% Never 11.7% Question 2 of the Job Satisfaction section asked respondents what level of satisfaction described how they felt about their current employment place. When the responses from this question were analyzed and cross checked with the responses from other questions there seemed to be a disparity. Respondents thought recognition was important, and 37.7% never or rarely were satisfied with the recognition they received. 39% never received recognition but 57.2% were either very satisfied or satisfied with their current job. Question 2—Section 3 Question 3 was like Question 4 in Part 2. When considering different job opportunities, the question asked respondents how each item would be rated with number 1 as the most important and number 6 as the least important. In the previous question respondents were asked what the most important forms of recognition and appreciation are. Only one item could be rated as the first and subsequent choices. Tappears to have confused respondents with this question so that twelve of the original eighty-nine respondents did not finish the survey. The results of Question 3 were consistent with the results of Question 4 in Part 2. When considering the importance of different types of recognition and opportunities wages and salaries and health insurance were the top items. However, bonuses and vacation time was not considered important when considering a new job opportunity. Section 4 of the survey was made up of six demographic questions. According to Iarossi (2006) as cited it Survey Monkey’s Smart Survey Design the placement of sensitive demographic questions should not be included in the beginning of the survey although there is no set rule. Iarossi recommended that personal information was best left to the end of the survey to allow respondents to develop a feeling of security and confidence in the survey’s objective. The researcher followed this recommendation. Question 1 asked respondents what their age group was. The answers showed that the sampling frame was primarily made up of people in the 43-53-year age bracket. 21-31 32-42 43-53 54-63 64+ 12.3% 12.3% 58% 14.8% 2.5% Demographic Question 2 asked respondents with which race or ethnic group did they most closely identify. RACE/ETHNIC GROUP Black (Non-Hispanic) 5.2% Hispanic 1.3% White 93.5% Question 3 asked respondents their gender. There was a nearly equal representation of both genders. GENDER Male 46.8% Female 53.2% Question 4 asked marital status. Although all groups were represented the largest percentages of respondents were married. MARITAL STATUS Single/Never Married 14.3% Domestic Partner 5.2% Married 66.2% Separated 3.9% Divorced 6.5% Widow/Widower 3.9% Question 5 of the demographic section asked respondents to indicate both their individual and combined household incomes. Question 6 was the final question of the survey and it asked respondents what their level of education was. All educational levels were represented. All survey questions individually did not indicate as to what respondents were satisfied. A filter was used to measure the correlation between incomes, job level and job satisfaction. Forty-four of the seventy-seven respondents or 57.1% indicated that they were either satisfied or very satisfied with their job. Among those respondents it was found that 79.5% had individual or combined household incomes greater than $78,000, 44.2 % of respondents indicated that they had received some type of incentive. Among the respondents who have received incentives 61.7% indicated that they were always or mostly satisfied with the amount of recognition they receive at work and 67.6% indicated that they were satisfied or very satisfied with their current job. Recognition satisfaction among respondents who have received incentives. Job satisfaction among respondent who have received incentives. More than half of those receiving incentives indicated that they were in a nonsupervisory position. By creating filters and cross checking the information the research suggests that when incentives and recognition are given to employees, job satisfaction does increase. General job satisfaction went from 57.2% from all respondents to 67.6% of the respondents who did receive incentives were satisfied with their current jobs. The filters also showed that respondents who made a better than average salary showed a higher level of job satisfaction. Limitations There were several limitations with the research process. One limitation was that sampling was not random, 68.9% of the respondents were employed in only two sectors which limited the number of respondents in private or other sectors. A second limitation was that 35.1% of the 68.9% were civil servant unionized workers where union contractunion contracts control bonuses and incentives control bonuses and incentives. The researcher felt that more than half, 50.7%, of respondents were employed at their current place of employment for 13 years or more which leads to the assumption that respondents were satisfied enough to continue with long term employment. Respondents who were employed in both the civil service and educational sector were from the Patchogue campus of St. Joseph’s College and the Nassau County Correctional Facility Both are not extremely diverse groups; therefore, this research lacks representation from respondents in minority ethnic groups. One question in the third section also caused some limitations. The question was not worded well, and respondents became frustrated and did not finish the survey. Twelve respondents did not continue to the final section. The problem question asked respondents to rate advancement opportunities, bonuses, health insurance, starting wage, vacation, and wage/salary increase policy when considering job opportunities by order of importance allowing only one choice to be a first choice, another to be second and so on. When respondents tried to give more than one item the same ranking, they could not go any further in the survey. Rather than finish, it appears respondents stopped taking the survey. Although emailing the surveys was timesaving it also created some limitations. Email allowed respondents to put the survey aside. It did lower the number of completed surveys that were returned. Initially one-hundred and twenty-four surveys were emailed and only eighty-nine were returned. There may have been a higher rate of responses if surveys were handed out. However, the opportunity to deliver so many may have decreased. Since this research project was part of a class requirement there were time and resource restraints. A larger number of respondents could have been reached with a general Survey Monkey mass emailing. Still, the researcher purposely limited the number of surveys sent out to make the incoming information manageable and obtainable in short period. This limited sample size and the sample group. Conclusions and Recommendations The opinion of the researcher is that recognition and rewards do increase job satisfaction. However, the research shows that job satisfaction is also determined by other variables such as salary, benefits, and vacation. Respondents who made a fair salary regardless of their level of employment were satisfied with their current place of employment. Respondents who have been employed for a longer length of time also show a higher rate of satisfaction. Although almost all respondents agreed that recognition was important, salaries, health insurance and vacation were considered more important than bonuses and recognition. Respondents were not always satisfied with the amount of recognition they received but interestingly 52% of respondents who received recognition were in nonsupervisory positions and of those 62% indicated that they were always or mostly satisfied with the amount of recognition they receive at work and 68% percent indicated that they were satisfied or very satisfied with their current job. To further research this topic a larger random sample population should be surveyed. The survey should include respondents from a larger demographic area to see if recognition is prevalent in different locations. Questions should be more specific regarding job type, responsibilities, age, and gender to see how those variables affect job satisfaction and recognition. The responses should then be filtered down so that the researcher can measure the answers according to the different variables to get a true measurement of what specifically is affecting job satisfaction. Additional research should include whether wages are more important than recognition and bonuses because of the current economy or the high cost of living on Long Island versus other areas of the country where living expenses may be less. This research was only on rewards and recognition and the effect on job satisfaction. The literature review went into detail about how rewards and recognition effect job satisfaction, motivation, and retention. Additional research would be needed to see how recognition could be a tool for employers and management to motivate and retain their employees while at the same time creating an atmosphere that promotes job satisfaction. References Birchfield, R. (2010, August). Bounce the bonus: Richer rewards exist. New Zealand Management, 57(7), 28-29. Retrieved from‌ Cromie, J. (2008, November). Cracking the recognition code. Incentive, 182(11), 25-28. Daly, P. (2010, September 27). A pat on the back vs. more in the paycheck. Grand Rapids Business Journal, 28(40), 8. Dewhurst, M., Guthridge, M., & Mohr, E. (2010, March). Motivating people: Getting beyond money. McKinsey Quarterly, (1), 12-15. Gross, S. E., & Friedman, H. M. (2004, Summer/). Creating an effective total reward strategy: Holistic approach better supports business success. Benefits Quarterly, 20(3), 7-12. Harris, R. (2007, February). Just rewards. CFO, 23(2), 71-74. Hiles, A. (2009). Tough times demand focus: Total rewards strategy. Benefits Quarterly, 25(4), 44-47. Iarossi, G. (2006). The power of survey design: A user’s guide for managing surveys, interpreting results, and influencing respondents. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. Retrieved from Leyes, M. (2006, December). The right reward. Advisor Today, (101(12)), 79-80. Maccoby, M. (2010, July). The 4 r’s of motivation. Research Technology Management, 53(4), 60. Retrieved from ProQuest database. (2092728781) McMullen, T., Stark, M., & Jensen, D. (2007, May). The role managers can play in reward program effectiveness. Benefits & Compensation Digest, 44(5), 16-20. Miller, J. (2006, May). Beyond cold cash. CA Magazine, 139(4), 47-48. doi:21005189 Rosalie, J. (2005, July). Reward for value: Six steps to increasing your company’s people power. Benefits & Compensation Digest, 42(7), 28-33. Robb, D. (2007, August). A total view of employee rewards. HR Magazine, 52(8), 93-95. Retrieved from Ross, C. E., & Mirowsky, J. (1996, September). Economic and interpersonal work rewards: subjective utilities of men’s and women’s compensation. Social Forces, 75(1), 223-245. Ryan, J. R. (2010, June). Creative leadership: Four ideas for a positive workforce. Retrieved from http://www, Shepherd, L. (2010, September). Getting Personal. Workforce Management (serial online), 89(9), 24-29. Slater, P. T. (1999, August 31). One of business’s best employee-reward programs is simple recognition. The Sacramento Bee. Retrieved from Smolkin, S. (2007, August). Total rewards statements promote attraction, retention. Employee Benefit News, 38. Spitzer, D. R. (1996, May). Power rewards: Rewards that really motivate. Management Review, 85(5), 45-50. Testa, B. (200/‌, September 22). Early engagement, long relationship. Workforce Management, 87(15), 27-31. Tulgan, B. (2009, December). Managing in the new workplace. Financial Executive, 25(10), 50-53. Appendix 1 March 17, 2011 Dear Respondent, My name is ANY STUDENT and I am currently a student at St. Joseph’s College. I would like your help in obtaining data needed for my Research Seminar Class. My research seeks to examine the correlation between employee job satisfaction and employee benefits. The survey is anonymous, all answers are confidential, and the information obtained will be used only for writing my research paper. I will be using Survey Monkey to distribute the surveys and collect the information. Survey Monkey will compile the data and forward the results to me. You will be receiving an email from Survey Monkey shortly with a link directing you to my survey. Thank you in advance for helping me with this assignment and if you have any question please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Any Student Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Employer Recognition and Appreciation Which type(s) of incentives have you received at your current place of employment? (Please select all that apply) Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Cash bonus 24.7% 19 Extra time off 16.9% 13 Special monetary value award (Gift Certificates or similar Items) 23.4% 18 None 55.8% 43 Other type of incentive (please specify) 6.5% answered question 77 skipped question 0

Our affordable academic writing services save you time, which is your most valuable asset. Share your time with your loved ones as our experts deliver unique, and custom-written paper for you.

Get a 15% discount on your order using the following coupon code SAVE15

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper