Running head: RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 1

Retention and Job Satisfaction: Effects of Leadership Style

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

Master of Science in Psychology

Marisol Romaldo Blanco

Purdue University Global

2020

Author Note

Marisol R. Blanco, Department of Graduate Psychology, Purdue University Global.

The author wishes to express sincere appreciation to her Thesis Advisor, Dr. Gabrielle

Blackman, and her Thesis Committee Members, Dr. Casey DeBruyn and Dr. James McGinley.
 ProQuest Number: 28155898

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

ProQuest 28155898

Published by ProQuest LLC ( 2020 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All Rights Reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 2

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to identify the best leadership style that increases job

satisfaction and retention in Soldiers of the U.S Army. A total of 423 surveys were submitted, of

the 423, only 255 were found valid based on completeness. There was no single instrument to

measure all variables; therefore, a compilation of surveys was created for leadership style, job

satisfaction and retention. Results demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between

transformational leadership and job satisfaction and transactional leadership and job satisfaction.

Retention questions were individually correlated with both leadership styles. Two retention items

demonstrated statistically significant correlations with both transformational and transactional

leadership style. Findings are conclusive with the research question, both leadership styles

influence job satisfaction and retention. A major implication of this study is the association with

transformational and transactional leadership and retention and job satisfaction. Although, there

is a robust correlation with both leadership styles it does not suggest that every service member

who is satisfied with their job will retire. Future research should focus on different types of

Army units as they may require a different type of leadership style based on their respective

duties.

Keywords​: retention, job satisfaction, leadership style, transformational, transactional

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 3

Table of Contents

Literature Review 6
Summary and Research Question 13
Method 15
Participants 15
Measures 16
Procedures 18
Data Management 19
Statistical Analysis 20
Results 20
Discussion 22
Limitations 24
Conclusion 26
References 27
Appendix A: Research Announcement 31
Appendix B: Informed Consent Form 32
Appendix C: Questionnaire 35
Appendix D: Tables 41
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 4

Retention and Job Satisfaction: Effects of Leadership Style

For the United States (U.S.) Army, early turnover is a persistent problem involving high

costs associated with selecting, training, recruiting, and attracting Soldiers (Clark et al., 1999;

Sminchise, 2016; Strickland, 2005). About 30% to 35% of enlisted service members separate

before completing their mandatory terms of service (Sanchez, Bray, Vincus & Bay, 2004). It

costs about $20,000 to send an individual through basic training (Clark et al., 1999). According

to Knapp (2020), issues in retaining service members cause shortages of experienced leaders,

lower job satisfaction, and decrease military efficiency. Given the costs involved with Soldier

turnover, the U.S. Army must identify effective ways to retain Soldiers past their first-term

enlistment. Retention refers to the degree to which military personnel willingly choose to stay

after their mandatory term of service has ended (Knapp, 2020). Understanding the decisions

driving Soldier retention is a significant issue (Strickland, 2005). Soldier retention is essential to

maintaining unit readiness and morale.

Factors affecting retention vary. Although there is much research addressing turnover,

there is not as much examining retention. Sminchise (2016) argues two significant reasons why

Soldiers leave the military include dissatisfaction with the circumstances in the Army and the

desire for alternative opportunities outside of the military. Research on the retention of members

in organizations identifies job satisfaction, the quality of leader-member exchange, leadership

variables, organizational culture as factors affecting turnover (Armijo, 2017).

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 5

The focus of this study was to examine the effects of leadership style on Soldiers’ job

satisfaction levels and decisions to continue their service. Job satisfaction is the emotional

fulfillment an individual receives from their job (Erwin et al., 2019). Job satisfaction is essential

as a service member who is content with their job is likely to stay. Job satisfaction fosters

retention (Sminchise, 2016). Identifying the right leadership style could increase Soldiers’ job

satisfaction and retention. Effective leaders believe in people and are driven by a set of values to

include loyalty, personal attention, and trust, which could influence followers to experience

greater organizational commitment (Raja & Palnichanmy, 2011).

Kippenberger (2002) defines leadership style as a style that a leader adopts based on the

contacts with those who follow them. Leadership styles are developed based on the specific

demands of the situation, the requirements of the followers, and challenges facing the

organizations (Erwin, Rahmat, Angga, & Semerdanta, 2019). Burns (1978) theorized that

leadership is either transactional or transformational. Transformational leadership is the

relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders; it is based

on four elements: intellectual stimulation, idealized influence, individualized consideration, and

inspirational motivation (Burns, 1978). It creates a significant transformation in organizations

and the life of individuals. Transformational leaders foster the commitment of the follower

towards the organization and give them the motivation to enhance their performance.

Transformational leadership is an approach based on a leader’s personality and the ability to

make change through example, energizing vision, articulation, and challenging goals. Contrarily,

a transactional leader takes the initiative in making contact with others for an exchange of valued

things (Burns, 1978). Transactional leaders value structure and order, they can command military
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 6

operations as they require rules and regulations to complete objectives on time. Transactional

leaders depend on individuals who are self-motivated and work well in a structured environment.

Leadership Style and Retention

Booth-Kewley, Dell’Acqua, and Thomsen (2017) studied factors that affect

organizational commitment in Navy Corpsman. Organizational commitment is the psychological

state described as an association of an employee with the organization, which includes job

satisfaction, performance, organizational citizenship, and absenteeism (Booth-Kewley et al.,

2017). The objective of this study was to identify psychological factors and demographics

associated with organizational commitment. Retaining experienced employees in all

organizations is essential, given the high cost of training and recruiting new service members a

factor associated with retention is job satisfaction (Booth-Kewley et al., 2017). The sample of the

study consisted of 1,597 active duty Navy Hospital Corpsman composed of only male

participants. The reason for males is the participants are Fleet Marine Force (FMF) Corpsman,

who serves as Field Medical Service Technicians in combat environments. The Corpsmen were

from Camp Pendleton, California, recruited between February 2013 and September 2014.

Participants ranged from enlisted grades only of E-1 to E7, with ages ranging between 18 and 45;

44% of the participants had a high school diploma; 49% were white. Participants for the study

completed a pretest and a post-test survey. The data used for the study came from the pretest

surveys. They completed the surveys in a classroom setting, consisting of a total of eight classes

ranging from 170 to 225 students. Six of the factors showed significant correlations with

organizational commitment: preservice motivation to be a Corpsman, confidence regarding

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 7

promotions, positive perceptions of Corpsman training, occupational self-efficacy, social support

for a Corpsman career, and lower depression. Findings demonstrated factors associated with

organizational commitment: the degree of an individual’s job satisfaction and retention. The

study recommends military leaders and policymakers to take concrete steps to address the factors

to strengthen organizational commitment. The authors recommended further research identifying

ways in which organizational commitment could strengthen job satisfaction and retention.

Armijo (2017) studied the transformational leadership style in a military environment and

the attrition and retention of military members. Active duty service members from a unit in the

United States Marine Corps participated in the study. The selection of the sample was limited to

Marines with personal experiences under the leadership of a member with a transformational

leadership style. The sample included members who were active duty, reenlisted at least once,

and had no legal issues pending. Participants were from a unit within the Marines that resemble a

larger U.S. military organization. A total of 20 members took part in the study. To identify

leaders with transformational characteristics and leadership qualities, the author performed

interviews in a group setting with the participants and administered the Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire (MLQ) electronically. The findings of the study reveal a positive relationship

between transformational leadership and attrition of service members. Attrition was assessed

using a qualitative method. The findings contribute to our understanding of transformational

leadership qualities and retention in the military. It is essential to examine leadership styles as

they play a significant role in job satisfaction and retention. The findings showed that using the

transformational leadership model allows for the empowerment of followers, reducing turnover,

and improving job satisfaction in service members (Armijo, 2017). The study's weaknesses were
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 8

the size of the study and the limitation in only using one unit within the Marines. Not allowing

other units to participate prevents the examination of factors such as differences based on the

type of units and deployments.

Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction

Nazim (2016) used a survey research method to identify the relationship between

Principals' transformational and transactional leadership style and job satisfaction. A total of 43

colleges participated in the survey from Punjab, a province of Pakistan. The study included a

random selection of five teachers from each college involved. To rate the teachers’ leadership

styles, Nazim used a questionnaire with seven indicators consisting of three variables associated

with transactional leadership style and four with a transformational leadership style. The second

questionnaire, the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), assessed participants’ job

satisfaction. The findings of the research study showed a significant relationship between

leadership style and job satisfaction. Although both leadership styles showed a correlation with

job satisfaction, transformational leadership had a more substantial relationship with job

satisfaction. Nazim (2016) concluded that transformational leadership motivates subordinates

and encourages an interest in the organization's commitment by putting it first. The study showed

that both leadership styles were associated with improving job satisfaction; however, the authors

saw a significant increase in transformational leadership. The study only focused on 43 colleges

and excluded mixed colleges, the authors do not state the rationale for the exclusion; yet, it did

limit the population to only colleges from their choosing. Males and females were part of the

study; however, the study should have expanded the populations and allowed mixed colleges to

participate.
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 9

Sanchez, Bray, Vincus, and Bann (2004) studied demographic, physical, and

psychological predictors of job satisfaction in members of the Armed Forces. The data consisted

of 24,881 records collected from a comprehensive data set from the entire military. The

information was from two studies: The Total Force Health Assessment (TFHA) and Perceptions

of Wellness and Readiness (POWR). The individuals selected in both studies were selected using

sex, pay grade, service, ethnicity, race, and locations as the sampling strata (Sanchez et al.,

2004). The focus of the study assessed 12-item Job Pressures scale the items clustered into four

indexes reflecting job versus non-job conflict, quality concern, role conflict, and responsibility.

The analyses were conducted using SUDAAN software for the correlation and statistical

analysis. Results determined that the two significant predictors of job satisfaction in Active Duty

and Reserve/Guard personnel are perceived by the amount of job pressure and job-related issues

such as a supervisor (Sanchez et al., 2004). Although age, pay grade, and race played a vital role

in predicting job satisfaction, the study suggests that job satisfaction is self-selection as older

members are likely to have more happiness and therefore continue with their service. The

findings indicate the military must take steps to increase job satisfaction to increase the

likelihood of members remaining in the military. The study's major strength was the

comprehensive data collected; however, only a few job satisfaction dimensions were examined

in the study. Understanding the leadership style as it correlates to job satisfaction and retention is

vital. Developing leaders to enable and promote soldiers' job satisfaction will help increase

retention in the military.

Kane and Tremble (2000) investigated the differential effects of transactional and

transformational leadership behaviors across the United States Army on an increased range of
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 10

secondary outcomes conducive to organizational performance. The data collected and analyzed

consisted of 3,204 Soldiers, both male and female, from 41 battalions in the United States of the

six Army posts. The data came from successive positions in the organizational hierarchy from

each battalion consisting of a battalion commander, four company commanders, 16 platoon

leaders, and 160 enlisted members. The soldiers reported views of themselves, the unit, and the

leadership behavior of their direct supervising officer (Kane & Tremble, 2000). The authors used

the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), Form 5X to assess transformational

leadership. The form measures the five forms of transformational behavior: attributed charisma,

idealized influence, inspirational leadership, intellectual stimulation, and individualized

consideration. The form also measures three forms of transactional behavior: contingent reward,

active management-by-exception, and passive management-by-exception. They used the

four-item job motivation scale to measure job motivation. They collected data using

demographic questionnaires mailed to the contacts for distribution to the participating officers

(Kane & Tremble, 2000). Results were consistent with prior research indicating that

transformational leadership accounts for unique variance in the extra effort put forth by

subordinates (Kane & Tremble, 2000). The results supported Bass’s (1985) theory for an

increased range of subordinate’s job motivation and moral commitment. The study also showed

the importance of transformational leadership suitability or similar military behaviors to

increased subordinated and group success. The results suggest that organizations should carefully

consider the leadership behaviors they promote. Subordinates are the leaders of tomorrow.

Transformational leadership has a unique effect on outcomes reflecting long term and moral

commitment, which are essential to the retention of Soldiers. Although the research supports the
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 11

transformational leadership style to increase the range of subordinate outcomes and

organizational performance, it is important to replicate and understand the extent of its findings

by using only one leadership style. The transformational leadership style suggests successful

group development, which is essential in a military setting when considering platoon and

Soldiers' job satisfaction and retention.

Leadership Style: Transformational and Transactional

Roibu, Nica, and Hornoiu (2019) studied transformational and transactional leadership as

the primary leadership styles in leading hotel employees. The study’s focus was to find how

empowering leadership can generate business quality, make customers happier, and increase

Romanian tourism. The authors used a qualitative interview, which provided in-depth detail

from the participants’ responses. To analyze the leadership styles, they conducted six interviews

in Romania between May and June 2018. The participants range from the receptionist,

housekeeping, and reservations coordinator. They reached participants through WhatsApp or by

phone and gave participants the option to interview via phone call, message reply, or a face to

face meeting. The benefits of transformational leadership are that it allows for the quick

formulation of vision, uses encouragement to motivate people, and promotes excitement. While a

disadvantage of transformational leadership is that it can have serious challenges as it carries a

prominent potential for abuse (Roibu et al., 2019). Both leadership styles are practical and

demonstrated significant benefits for organizations. The study had an exceedingly small sample,

and a much bigger sample is required to account for higher reliability.

Bernard, Bruce, Dong, and Yair (2013) examined how units running under steady

conditions predict subsequent performance compare to those units under stress and ambiguity.
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 12

To study this, the authors measured the leadership styles of transformational and transactional.

The sample population consisted of 72 platoons made up of three rifle squads and a heavy squad

who participated in joint readiness exercise (Bernard et al., 2013). The total number of

participants ranged between 1,340 and 1,335, with the total number of raters for unit cohesion

and potency of 1,594. The data was collected in the form of a survey from four different Army

posts. MLQ-Form 5X was used to measure 36 leadership items. The study examines how

transactional group reward and transformational leadership of both sergeants and platoon leaders

correlate with unit strength and cohesion and how it predicts performance in challenging

conditions (Bernard et al., 2013). In the context of the study, both leadership styles were

successful in performance. The authors note that the sergeant transformational leadership was

beyond prognostic of unit performance. The explanation behind is that the First Sergeant in the

United States Army has more contact with platoon members on a daily basis as well as greater

tenure in the Army than platoon leaders. The study supports further research necessary to

investigate the leadership style most effective for military service members. It consists of

performance, which supports job satisfaction and retention.

The literature review suggests that transformational leadership influences job motivation;

therefore, increases job satisfaction and retention while transactional leadership helps increase

rewards which can also help with retention and job satisfaction. (Armijo, 2017; Nazim, 2016)

studied both leadership styles and discovered transactional leadership style, the best predictor for

job satisfaction and retention. However, (Roibu, Nica and Hornoiu 2019) discover that

transformational leadership can carry prominent abuse. While (Bernard et al., 2013) emphasize

on transformational leadership being the best leadership style working under stress and
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 13

ambiguity. Transformational leadership style supports many studies in reference to job

satisfaction due to its ability to motivate subordinates. However, transactional leadership rewards

subordinates which in the military is significant for Soldiers, who need recognition for their hard

work. Motivation is important but rewarding Soldiers can go long ways. Both leadership styles

have the capability of increasing job satisfaction and increasing retention; however, in the

military, it is important to identify the best to save money and resources and increase job

satisfaction in an environment where stress is prominent. Finding the right leadership style can

help the military by retaining Soldiers while encouraging job satisfaction. The current research

aims to address the concern. Therefore, the Research question of the current study is

t​ransactional or transformational leadership style the best predictor of Soldiers’ retention and job

satisfaction?

Summary and Research Question

d Armijo (2017) studied the qualitative experience in organizational leadership and the

understanding of the effectiveness of transformational leadership, which suggests that the

behaviors of transformational leadership can increase the quality of leader-member exchange and

increase retention in service members. Nazim (2016) explored the relationship between two

leadership styles and job satisfaction in teachers and discovered a relationship in

transformational and transactional leadership style and job satisfaction. Both studies discover

transformational leadership was better than transactional leadership. Sanchez, Bray, Vincus, and

Bann (2004) studied the demographic, psychological, and physical predictors of job satisfaction

in members of the Armed forces and discovered that a supervisor can intervene to increase job
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 14

satisfaction and retention. Kane and Tremble (2000) studied the differential effects of

transactional and transformational leadership behaviors in the United States Army about

organizational performance and discovered that the unique effects of transformational leaders on

follower’s job motivation increased. Roibu et al. (2019) studied the transformational and

transactional leadership style in hotel employees and discovered that transformational leadership

style influences the formulation of vision and encourages motivation and excitement yet that it

carries prominent abuse while transactional leadership style rewards employees. Bernard et al.,

(2013) studied transactional and transformational leadership styles in leaders underperformance

and discovered that transformational leaders performed better under stress and ambiguity.

The literature review suggests that transformational leadership influences job motivation;

therefore, it increases job satisfaction and retention while transactional leadership helps increase

rewards, which can also help with retention and job satisfaction. Armijo (2017) and Nazim

(2016) studied both leadership styles and discovered the transactional leadership style is the best

predictor for job satisfaction and retention. However, Roibu et al. (2019) discovered that

transformational leadership can carry prominent abuse. While Bernard et al. (2013) emphasized

transformational leadership being the best leadership style working under stress and ambiguity.

The transformational leadership style supports many studies about job satisfaction due to its

ability to motivate subordinates. However, transactional leadership rewards subordinates, which

in the military is significant for Soldiers who need recognition for their hard work. Motivation is

important, but rewarding Soldiers can go long ways. There are many leadership styles; however,

in the military, it is essential to identify the best to save money and resources and increase job

satisfaction in an environment where stress is prominent. Finding the right leadership style can
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 15

help the military by retaining Soldiers while encouraging job satisfaction. This research aimed to

address the concern. Therefore, the research question of the study was; is transactional or

transformational leadership style the best predictor of Soldiers’ retention and job satisfaction?

Transactional leadership was expected to increase retention and job satisfaction.

Method

Participants

The population for the research was Soldiers of the United States Army. To participate,

the Soldier had to be between the age of 21 and 34, currently serving with a minimum of one

reenlistment. The research was open to all genders. The researcher posted the Research

Announcement on the Facebook pages of several open access groups frequented by Soldiers in

the United States Army. Facebook’s terms of service allow such research postings; see

www.facebook.com/terms. The Research Announcement remained on the social media sites for

four weeks and was re-posted there by the researcher repeatedly to keep the announcement

appearing in the news feed for the selected groups. Some Facebook groups were moderated;

others are not. Some groups include language in their terms disallowing posting on their pages

for research and data collection. The researcher only posted the Research Announcement on

Facebook pages whose terms allow postings for research or data collection purposes. If this was

not clear from the terms, the researcher contacted the group moderator and requested permission

to post the Research Announcement. If permission was granted, the researcher included

documentation of such permission in the present work as an appendix and then posted the

Research Announcement on that group page.

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 16

The ResearchAnnouncement included a link to an anonymous survey, accessed via

SurveyMonkey. The link took the subject to SurveyMonkey, where the subject first saw and

agreed to the Informed Consent; see Appendix B for text of Informed Consent. If subjects agreed

to the Informed Consent, they were then automatically presented with the survey to complete

online. If subjects did not agree to the Informed Consent, they were taken to a thank you page

and participation was terminated at that point. Although it was unlikely, if subjects experience

any emotional discomfort as a result of completing the survey, they were allowed to contact the

Emotional Distress Hotline, a national mental health hotline, available 24/7 for free, at

1-800-LIFENET. After several weeks, the SurveyMonkey survey was closed and the data

analyzed.

Measures

The goal of the study was to identify what leadership style could increase job satisfaction

and retention in different units in the United States Army. There was no single instrument to

measure all variables; therefore, a compilation of surveys was created. The researcher developed

a survey of 15 questions to measure leadership style. For job satisfaction, the researcher used the

Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS), which consisted of 36 items. The researcher developed a 10-item

survey to assess retention, particularly military retention. The measures included a Likert rating

scale to capture the participants perception. The researcher used an aggregate scoring method.

Leadership Style. ​To measure transformational and transactional leadership, a total of 15

questions were developed. The researcher developed the questions for transformational

leadership using the four components; Idealised​ Influence, Intellectual Stimulation,

Individualized Consideration and Inspirational Motivation ​as described by Bass

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 17

(1985).Transactional leadership questions were developed using two components;

Management-by-exception and Contingent Reward also described by Bass (1985). ​ Figure 1 and

Figure 2 demonstrate what component belongs to each question. Both leadership styles were

measured using a 6 point Likert scale; 1- Disagree very much; 2-Disagree moderately;

3-Disagree slightly; 4-Agree slightly; 5-Agree moderately; 6-Agree very much.

Figure 1: Questions related to Transformational Leadership

Figure 2: Questions related to Transactional Leadership

Job Satisfaction. ​The researcher used the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS), created by Paul

E. Spector, PhD, to measure job satisfaction. Reliability of the questionnaire was at an acceptable

range and its a valid questionnaire to use amongst the military, it was previously reported at 0.86

using the Cronbach's Alpha method. (Gholmi-Fesharaki et al., 2012). The JSS consists of 36

items, with nine facet scales that assess employee attitudes and aspects about the job. Each facet
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 18

was assessed with four items. The items were measured using a six-choice score ranging from

“strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”. The nine facets consisted of; promotion, pay,

supervision, contingent rewards and fringe benefits, coworkers, operating procedures, nature of

work and communication. All nine facets were related to military organizations.

Retention. ​The researcher developed the retention questions based on the six factors that

correlate with organizational commitment: preservice motivation, confidence regarding

promotions, positive perceptions of training, occupational self-efficacy, social support in their

career, and lower depression (Booth-Kewley et al., 2017). The questions were developed for

soldiers in the Army with the intent of re-enlisting. A total of 10 questions were created using a 6

point Likert scale for measurement ranging from “strongly agree’ to ‘strongly disagree”.

See Appendix C for the measure. The survey was reviewed and edited by a doctoral-level

psychologist with a specialization in survey design. This improved the face and content validity

of the survey. Face validity suggests that the survey measures what it aims to measure based

upon a simple reading of the questions. Content validity indicates that the instrument represents

all key aspects of the construct it was designed to measure. Nevertheless, as a new survey

developed specifically for the present research, no data were available on the reliability or

validity of the questions or the instrument beyond face and content validity.

Procedures

The researcher contacted various U.S. Army Facebook Groups and requested permission

to post the Research Announcement (See Appendix A) on the groups. The Research

Announcement included a link to the surveys. The survey was accessed via SurveyMonkey (See
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 19

Appendix C). Following the link, it prompted the participants to read the description and purpose

of the study and the Informed Consent (See Appendix B). If the participant met all qualifications

and agreed to take part, they were directed to complete the survey. If a participant did not meet

the qualifications or refused to participate, they were taken to a thank you page where

participation was terminated. After seven weeks the survey was no longer active. At that moment

the researcher analyzed all the data collected.

Data Management

To ensure the anonymity of the survey participants, in SurveyMonkey, the researcher did

not collect IP addresses. ​For this study, data from the survey SurveyMonkey was transferred into

an SPSS database for analysis. All the results were presented in aggregate form to protect

subjects' identities. Data was accessible to the researcher only in the form of completed survey

data that was saved and maintained on an encrypted flash drive, kept in a locked file cabinet in

the researcher’s home. The SPSS database used for data analysis was accessible only by using a

strong password known to the researcher and the thesis committee. The dataset did not contain

any coded identifiers and, as such, was completely anonymous.

All electronic data was stored on an encrypted flash drive. No data was stored on any

computer hard drive. Following the completion of the research, the data set and related files are

to be retained by the researcher for a minimum of five years in case questions arise about the

analyses. After the five years, this data will be destroyed using the current Department of

Defense data destruction standards. An affordable technique, such as encryption, will likely be

chosen, pending technology at the time.

Statistical Analysis
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 20

The data analysis was conducted using IBM’s SPSS statistical software. Descriptive

statistics were used to include frequencies, mean, range, standard deviation, skewness, and

kurtosis. A correlation analysis was performed to analyze the relationship between the following

construct; transformational leadership and job satisfaction, transformational leadership and

retention, transactional leadership and job satisfaction, and transactional leadership and retention.

Results

Participants were recruited via various Facebook Groups specifically for Soldiers in the

United States Army. The survey was available for a total of three weeks. A total of 423 surveys

were submitted, of the 423 only 255 were found valid based on completeness. Table D1

represents the demographics of the respondents. Of the 255 who completed the survey, males

represent 54%, females represent 45%, and 1% preferred not to answer. The mean of the age

group was 34. The position that was reported the most was Staff Sergeant at 32%. ​The response

rate is unknown as there is no way of knowing how many people viewed the research

announcement.

Leadership Style

Leadership style was measured using a self developed questionnaire with components of

transformational and transactional leadership based on Bass (1985). A 6-point Likert scale was

used to measure leadership style. A total of 255 Soldiers completed the survey. Transformational

leadership was measured using questions 1 through 10 and reported (​M​=39.3. ​SD=
​ 14.53).

Transactional leadership was measured using questions 11 through 15 and reported (​M​=17.7.

​ 6.16). Correlations were used to determine a relationship between the variables as shown in
SD=

Table D3.
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 21

Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction was measured using the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS), created by Paul E.

Spector, Ph.D. The JSS consists of 36 items, with nine facet scales that assess employee attitudes

and aspects of the job. The items were measured using a 6-point Likert scale. Job satisfaction

reported (​M​=130.85. ​SD =

​ 28.56) (see Table D2).

Retention

Retention was measured using a questionnaire developed by the researcher. The

questions were developed based on the six factors that correlate with organizational

commitment. All retention questions were evaluated individually. The two most important

questions that demonstrated statistically significant correlations with retention (see Correlational

Analyses) were question number 2 “My supervisor plays an important role in my decision to

​ 2.93. ​SD​=1.83) and question number 10 “The encouragement of from leadership

re-enlist” (​M=

will determine if I re-enlist” (​M​=2.93. ​SD=

​ 1.83). See Table D2 for all retention questions

statistics.

Correlational Analyses

Results clearly indicate a statistically significant correlation between Transformational

Leadership and Job Satisfaction and transactional leadership and job satisfaction. The

participants' average transformational leadership scores and job satisfaction, as measured (​r

(243)=.67, ​p​ < .000). Transactional leadership scores and job satisfaction measure as followed

(​r(​ 242)=.64, ​p​ < .000). Table D3 shows statistically significant correlations, from which one can

confirm that both leadership styles influence job satisfaction in Soldiers in the United States

Army. Retention questions were measured individually for correlations. Two questions stand out
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 22

the most with a statistically significant correlation between transformational leadership and

retention and transactional leadership and retention. Question number 2 showed ​a statistically

significant correlation between participants' average transformational leadership scores and

retention, as measured in the question "my supervisor plays an important role in my decision to

re-enlist" (​r​(254) = .32, ​p​ = .001)). Question number 10 “​the encouragement from leadership will

determine if I re-enlist” measured ​(​r​(254) = .34, ​p​ = .001)). Transactional leadership scores and

retention measure in question “my supervisor plays an important role in my decision to re-enlist"

(​r(​ 253) = .26, ​p​ = .001)). Question number 10 “​the encouragement from leadership will

determine if I re-enlist” measured ​(​r​(253) = .26, ​p​ = .001)) based on transactional leadership

scores and retention. Results​ confirm that a supervisor or leader has a significant role in a

soldier's decision to re-enlist.

Regression Analyses

Linear regression analyses provided further insight into the relationship between the

variables. The researcher regressed the retention variable (“I plan to retire from the United States

Army once I reach 20 years of service”) and transactional leadership. The model regressing

retention onto transformational leadership was statistically significant (​F​(1,252) = 5.616, ​p​ =019,

R2​ =.022). The model regressing retention onto transactional leadership was not statistically

significant (​F​(1,251 ) =2.932, ​p​ =.088 , ​R2​ =.012). The researcher also regressed an aggregate

form of the job satisfaction variable onto transformational leadership and transactional

leadership. The model regressing job satisfaction onto transformational leadership was

statistically significant (​F​(1 ,241) =183.755, ​p​ =001 , ​R2​ =.433). The model job satisfaction onto

transactional leadership was statistically significant (​F​(1,240 ) =169.259 , ​p​ =001, ​R2​ =.414).
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 23

Discussion

The United States Army spends about $20,000 to send an individual through basic

training (Clark et al., 1999). Retention is detrimental to saving the military money. Sminchise

(2016) proposes two major reasons why Soldiers leave the military. Reasons include job

dissatisfaction within the Army and the desire for alternative opportunities outside of the

military. If Soldiers are dissatisfied with their circumstances in the Army, they are likely to leave

the service members causing a loss of about $20,000 per service member. The purpose of this

research was to identify the best leadership style to increase job satisfaction and retention in

soldiers of the United States Army. A correlation analysis was performed to identify if

transformational or transactional leadership helps increase job satisfaction and retention.

Transformational and job satisfaction were tested to identify a correlation. Results

indicated a significant statistical correlation. The study presents empirical evidence that

transformational leaders can help increase job satisfaction in soldiers of the U.S. Army. The

second hypothesis tested was transactional and job satisfaction. Results show a significant

statistical correlation, implying that transactional leadership helped increase job satisfaction.

The third variables tested were transformational leadership and each retention question. Three

questions show significant statistical correlations. Questions two and three focus on the

supervisor and co-workers playing an important role in the Soldier decision to reenlist. A strong

correlation confirmed that a transformational supervisor having a leadership role in the

organization can influence a soldier in their decision to re-enlist. It was also confirmed in

question ten stating that the encouragement of leadership will determine if a soldier reenlist.
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 24

Transactional leadership and each retention question were tested for correlation. A significant

correlation was identified in question two and ten. Based on the results it is determined both

leadership styles play an important role in a soldier's job satisfaction and retention.

Implications

One major implication of this study is the association with transformational and

transactional leadership and retention and job satisfaction. Even though there is a strong

correlation with both leadership styles it does not imply that every service member who is

satisfied with their job will remain in the service until retirement. The military has many

different types of units and many require a different type of leadership style. Transformational

and transactional are only two types of leadership styles and while they may be beneficial for an

infantry unit it may not be beneficial for a medical unit.

Findings and Past Research

Booth-Kewley et al., (2017) conducted research to distinguish what demographics

and psychological factors are associated with organizational commitment. Findings revealed

that organizational commitment was determined based on the individual's job satisfaction.

While this study shows a significant relationship between retention and job satisfaction it

does not support the research. There was no relationship associated with the leadership style.

In contrast, Armijo (2017) research findings are consistent with job satisfaction and

leadership styles. There is a significant relationship between transformational leadership

style, retention, and job satisfaction. Armijo (2017) research involved transformational

leadership style in the military and the attrition and retention of service members. The

findings showed that by using the transformational leadership model leaders empower

followers, reduce turnover, job satisfaction improved in service members (Armijo, 2017).
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 25

This is consistent with the statistical correlation with transformational leadership and job

satisfaction and transformational leadership and retention. Nazim (2016) researched the

relationship between transformational and transactional leadership and job satisfaction. The

study findings correlate with the research. Both leadership styles were associated with

improving job satisfaction; however, the research had a significant increase in

transformational leadership. In contrast in this research, both leadership has a significant

statistical correlation with job satisfaction. Another study consistent with the researcher’s

results is Roibu et al.’s (2019) study on transformational and transactional leadership as a

leading style at a hotel. Both leadership styles demonstrated significant benefits for

organizations and increased satisfaction. Bernard et al. (2013) examined multiple units that

performed under steady conditions and predicted subsequent performance. Transformational

and transactional leadership were used to measure the performance. Both leadership styles

were successful in performance, which is consistent with the research. All research was

consistent with both leadership styles as a factor in increased job satisfaction which

influences retention.

Limitations

There are several major limitations to the current study which elucidate that the

research is not entirely conclusive. The retention and leadership surveys were developed

specifically for this study and therefore; lack validity and reliability. The survey was

available to every enlisted service member in the U.S Army and not to a specific type of unit.

While transformational and transactional leadership have a significant correlation with job

satisfaction and retention, different military units require a specific type of leadership.

Although past research has shown both leadership styles are beneficial in schools, medical

fields, and military units, the military has a distinctive amount of units that run differently.
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 26

Future research should focus on distinctive types of units to identify if both leadership styles

have a positive impact. A final limitation was the response rate to the survey. The survey was

available in multiple Facebook groups and there was not a way to estimate how many

individuals view the post.

Conclusions

The study was designed to identify the best leadership style that helps influence job

satisfaction and retention in the United States Army soldiers. The findings of the study

suggest that both transformational and transactional leadership persuade job satisfaction and

retention. The Army should focus on helping leadership master the best leadership style for

their unit. Transformational leadership works well in changing the environment, influencing

subordinates in retention and rapport building relationships with subordinates encouraging

job satisfaction. Transactional leadership focuses on structures and rewarding soldiers by

recognizing their hard work; it promotes job satisfaction and retention. Both leadership styles

are great in a military environment, and adopting either leadership is beneficial.

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 27

References

Armijo, F. A. (2017). Effects of transformational leadership in the attrition of U.S. service

members (Order No. 10639323). ​Available from Military Database. (1970444350).

Retrieved from​ ​https://libauth.purdueglobal.edu/login?url=https://search

proquestcom.libauth.purdueglobal.edu/docview/1970444350?accountid=34544

Bernard M., B., Bruce J., A., Dong I., J., & Yair, B. (2003). Predicting unit performance by

assessing transformational and transactional leadership. ​Journal of Applied

Psychology, 88​(2), 207–218

Bass, B. M. (1985). ​Leadership and performance beyond expectations. ​New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (2000). ​MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire.​ Redwood

City: Mind Garden.

Burns, J.M. (1978) ​Leadership​. New York. Harper & Row.

Booth-Kewley, S., Dell’Acqua, R. G., & Thomsen, C. J. (2017). Factors affecting organizational

commitment in Navy Corpsmen. ​Military Medicine, 182​(7), e1794–e1800. Retrieve from

https://doiorg.libauth.purdueglobal.edu/10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00316

Clark, K. L., Mahmoud, R. A., Krauss, M. R., Kelley, P. W., & al, e. (1999). Reducing medical

attrition: The role of the accession medical standards analysis and research activity.

Military Medicine, 164​(7), 485-7. Retrieved from

https://libauth.purdueglobal.edu/login?url= https://search-proquest

com.libauth.purdueglobal.edu/docview/217056077?accountid=34544
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 28

Erwin, S., Rahmat, S. T. Y., Angga, N. D., & Semerdanta, P. (2019). Transformational

leadership style and work Life balance: The effect on employee satisfaction through

employee engagement. ​Russian Journal of Agricultural & Socio-Economic Sciences,

91​(7), 310. doi: 10.18551/rjoas.2019-07.3

Gholami-Fesharaki, Mohammad & Talebiyan, D. & Aghamiri, Z. & Mohammadian, M.. (2012).

Reliability and validity of "Job Satisfaction Survey" questionnaire in military health care

workers. ​Journal of Military Medicine, 13,​ 241-246

Kane TD, & Tremble TR. (2000). Transformational leadership effects at different levels of the

army. ​Military Psychology​ (Taylor & Francis Ltd), 12(2), 137–160

Kippenberger, T. (2002). ​Leadership styles: Leading 08.04​. Capstone.

Knapp, L. (2020). ​Defense primer: Active duty enlisted retention.​ (CRS Report No. IF 11274)

Retrieve from Congressional Research Service https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IF11274.pdf

Nazim, F. (2016). Principals’ transformational and transactional leadership style and job

satisfaction of college teachers. ​Journal of Education and Practice, 7(​ 34), 18–22.

Retrieve from​ https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1126682

Raja, A. S., & Palanichamy, P. (2011). Leadership styles and its impact on organizational

commitment. ​Journal of Commerce (22206043), 3(​ 4), 15–23. Retrieve from https://eds

a-ebscohost-com.libauth.purdueglobal.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&sid=

8913bc5d-562e-48dc-9fe0-b4b5593bab16%40sessionmgr4008
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 29

Roibu, S., Nica, A., & Hornoiu, R. (2019). Transformational or transactional leadership? The

impact of Romanian leadership styles on hotel employee’s commitment to business

excellence: Acces la success acces la success. ​Calitatea, 20(​ 171), 44-48. Retrieved from

https://libauth.purdueglobal.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest

com.libauth.purdueglobal.edu/docview/2262050421?accountid=34544

Sanchez R. P., Bray R. M., Vincus A. A., & Bann C. M., (2004). Predictors of job satisfaction

among active duty and reserve/guard personnel in the U.S. military. ​Military Psychology

(Taylor & Francis Ltd), 16​(1), 19–35. Retrieve from https://content.ebscohost.com/Con

tenServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=106722575&S=R&D=rzh&EbscoContent=dGJyMNLrS

prM4y9f3OLCmsEiep7dSr624SLKWxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMOzprkm3prV

Pfgeyx43zx

Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of the Job

Satisfaction Survey. ​American Journal of Community Psychology,​ ​13,​ 693-713.

Strickland, W. J. (2005). A longitudinal examination of first term attrition and reenlistment

among FY1999 enlisted accessions. ​Human Resources Research Organization

Alexandria VA​ Retrieve from https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a448564.pdf

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 30

Sminchise, V. (2016). Military retention. A comparative outlook. ​Journal of

DefenseResources Management, 7​(1), 85. Retrieved from

https://libauth.purdueglobal.edu/login?url=https://search

proquestcom.libauth.purdueglobal.edu/docview/1806428878?accountid=34544
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 31

Appendix A

Research Announcement

My name is Marisol Blanco.

I am conducting research through Purdue University Global to obtain a Master’s Degree in

Psychology.

The purpose of the research is to identify what leadership style increases job satisfaction and
retention in Soldiers of the United States Army.

If you are interested in taking the survey, please click here for more information:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/BKTGPLZ

The survey will take about 13 minutes of your time.

This study will be anonymous, so no one will know that you were a participant and no one will
ever be able to connect your answers to your identity.

Click here to participate! ​https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/BKTGPLZ

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 32

Appendix B

Purdue University Global

Consent for Participation in Research
Retention and Job Satisfaction: Effects of Leadership Style

Why am I being asked?

You are being asked to be a participant in a research study about the effects of leadership styles
with r​etention and job satisfaction​. This research study is being conducted by Marisol Blanco, a
Master’s of Science in Psychology student at Purdue University Global.. You have been asked to
participate in the research because you are a member of the United States Army and may be
eligible to participate. We ask that you read this form and ask any questions you may have before
agreeing to be in the research.

Your participation in this research is voluntary. Your decision whether or not to participate will
not affect your current or future relations with Purdue University Global. If you decide to
participate, you are free to withdraw at any time without affecting that relationship.

What is the purpose of this research?

The purpose of this research is to identify the best leadership style for units within the United
States Army that may help increase retention and job satisfaction in members of the military.

What procedures are involved?

If you agree to be in this research, we would ask you to do the following things:

A link to the informed consent and the questionnaires will be available via Facebook groups. It
will take approximately 13 minutes to complete. Questions will elicit you to reflect on different
aspects of your job in the United States Army.

Approximately 60 may be involved in this research at Purdue University Global.

What are the potential risks and discomforts?

The research has minimal risk. A minimal risk is that someone may identify you as a participant
in the research. I will not disclose or associate any information that associates your name to any
of the data collected. All information will be protected and accessible by password. No
information collected will be disclosed to anyone in your command or leadership.

Are there benefits to taking part in the research?

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 33

Participating in the research may help identify the best leadership style for units in the United
States Army that can help increase job satisfaction and retention in service members. The
research will suggest what leadership style is the best fit for leaders to adopt.

What about privacy and confidentiality?

No one will know that you are a research subject because this research is totally anonymous. No
information about you, or provided by you during the research, can ever be disclosed to others
because no information that can possibly identify you as an individual will be collected. When
the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no information will be
included that could ever reveal your identity.

Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you
will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law.

Will I be reimbursed for any of my expenses or paid for my participation in this research?
At this time, no reimbursement is available for participation in this research.

Can I withdraw from the study?

You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this study, you may
withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may also refuse to answer any
questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in the study.

Whom should I contact if I have questions?

The researcher conducting this study is Marisol Blanco. You may ask any questions you have
now. If you have questions later, you may contact the researchers at: Phone: (951) 385-7320.
You may also contact the researcher’s thesis adviser, Dr. Gabrielle Blackman PhD, at
[email protected].

What are my rights as a research subject?

If you feel you have not been treated according to the descriptions in this form, or you have any
questions about your rights as a research subject, you may contact the Institutional Review Board
(IRB) at Purdue University Global through the following representative:

Susan Pettine, IRB Chair

Email: [email protected]

Remember​: ​Your participation in this research is voluntary. Your decision whether or not to
participate will not affect your current or future relations with Purdue University Global. If you
decide to participate, you are free to withdraw at any time without affecting that relationship.
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 34

You may keep a copy of this form for your information and your records.

Signature of Subject
I have read (or someone has read to me) the above information. I have been given an opportunity
to ask questions and my questions have been answered to my satisfaction. I agree to participate
in this research. I have been given a copy of this form.

Signature Date

Printed Name

Signature of Researcher Date (must be same as subject’s)

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 35

Appendix C1

Demographics

1. What is your leadership role in your current assignment?

❏ Specialist and Below
❏ Sergeant
❏ Squad Leader
❏ Senior Non-Commissioned Officer
❏ Staff 2 (Staff Sergeant)
❏ Master 2 (Master Sergeant)
❏ 2 Major (Sergeant Major)
❏ Platoon 2 (Platoon Sergeant)
❏ First 2 (First Sergeant)

2. What race/ethnicity best describes you?

❏ American Indian or Alaskan Native
❏ Asian/Pacific Islander
❏ Black or African American
❏ Hispanic
❏ White/Caucasian
❏ Multiple ethnicity/Other (please specify): ___________
❏ Prefer Not to Answer

3. What is your gender?

❏ Male
❏ Female
❏ Other
❏ Prefer Not to Answer

4. What is your age?

❏ ___
RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 36

Appendix C2

Transformational and Transactional Leadership Survey

The following questions are related to your supervisor. Please select the response that most
reflects your opinion about it.

Responses are as follows; 1-Disagree very much; 2-Disagree moderately; 3-Disagree slightly;
4-Agree slightly; 5-Agree moderately; 6-Agree very much

1. I admire trust, and respect my supervisor.

2. My supervisor positively encourages me when obstacles arise.

​

3. My supervisor demonstrates moral conduct to the United States Army Ethics and Values.
​

4. My supervisor clearly communicates his/hers expectations.

​

5. My supervisor motivates and inspires me.

​

6. My supervisor provides meaningful and challenging projects.

​

7. My supervisor encourages me to look at problems from many different angles.

​

8. My supervisor does not counsel me or criticize me for my mistakes in front of others.

​

9. My supervisor encourages me to advance in my career by mentoring me in the necessary

requirements for the next rank.

10. My supervisor spends time coaching and mentoring me.

11. My supervisor gives me awards for my hard work.

12. When my supervisor gives me a goal he/she rewards me when I accomplished it by

giving me time off (four day pass), paying for my lunch, awards etc.,

13. When someone complaints about my behavior to my supervisor he/she uses corrective

measures to address the problem.

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 37

14. My supervisor clearly communicates expectations for every task given.

15. My supervisor does not micromanage me as long as I complete my task.

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 38

Appendix C3

Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS)

The following questions are related to your opinion about your job.

Responses are as follow:

1-Disagree very much; 2-Disagree moderately; 3-Disagree slightly; 4-Agree slightly; 5-Agree
moderately; 6-Agree very much

1. I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do.

2. There is really too little chance for promotion at my job. (Reverse scored)

3. My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her job.

4. I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive. (Reverse scored)

5. When I do a good job, I receive the recognition for it that I should receive.

6. Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good job difficult. (Reverse scored)

7. I like the people I work with.

8. I sometimes feel my job is meaningless. (Reverse scored)

9. Communications seem good within this organization.

10. Raises are too few and far between.(Reverse scored)

11. Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance of being promoted.

12. My supervisor is unfair to me.(Reverse scored)

13. The benefits we receive are as good as most other organizations offer.

14. I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated.(Reverse scored)

15. My efforts to do a good job are seldom blocked by red tape.

16. I find I have to work harder at my job because of the incompetence of people I work

with. (Reverse scored)

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 39

17. I like doing the things I do at work.

18. The goals of this organization are not clear to me.(Reverse scored)

19. I feel unappreciated by the organization when I think about what they pay me.(Reverse

scored)

20. People get ahead as fast here as they do in other places.

21. My supervisor shows too little interest in the feelings of subordinates.(Reverse scored)

22. The benefit package we have is equitable.

23. There are few rewards for those who work here.(Reverse scored)

24. I have too much to do at work.(Reverse scored)

25. I enjoy my coworkers.

26. I often feel that I do not know what is going on with the organization.(Reverse scored)

27. I feel a sense of pride in doing my job.

28. I feel satisfied with my chances for salary increase.

29. There are benefits we do not have which we should have.(Reverse scored)

30. I like my supervisor.

31. I have too much paperwork.(Reverse scored)

32. I don’t feel my efforts are rewarded the way they should be.(Reverse scored)

33. I am satisfied with my chances for promotion.

34. There is too much bickering and fighting at work.(Reverse scored)

35. My job is enjoyable.

36. Work assignments are not fully explained.(Reverse scored)

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 40

Appendix C4

Retention

The following questions are related to different aspects in your career that will determine if you
will re-enlist with the United States Army.

Responses are as follow: 1-Disagree very much; 2-Disagree moderately; 3-Disagree slightly;
4-Agree slightly; 5-Agree moderately; 6-Agree very much

1. I plan to retire from the United States Army once I reach 20 years of service.

2. My supervisor plays an important role in my decision to re-enlist.

3. My co-workers play an important role in my decision to re-enlist.

4. The opportunity for promotion will determine if I re-enlist.

5. Opportunity for growth plays an important role in my decision to re-enlist.

6. College benefits play an important role in my decision to re-enlist

7. Pride in serving my country plays a significant role in my decision to re-enlist.

8. My job satisfaction will determine if I re-enlist.

9. The type of assignment will determine if I re-enlist.

10. The encouragement from leadership will determine if I re-enlist.

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 41

Appendix D

Table D1

Respondents’ Sociodemographic Characteristics (N=100)

Measure All Subjects

Age 34

Gender

Male 54.5%

Female 45.1%

Prefer not to answer .4%

Position

Specialist and Below 5.9%

Sergeant 16.5%

Squad Leader 3.1%

Senior Non-Commissioned Officer 21.2%

Staff 2 (Staff Sergeant) 32.2%

Master 2 (Master Sergeant) 7.5%

2 Major (Sergeant Major) 2.7%

Platoon 2 (Platoon Sergeant) 6.7%

First 2 (First Sergeant) 3.1%

Race and Ethnicity

American Indian or Alaskan Native .8%

Asian/Pacific Islander 6.3%

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 42

Black or African-American 13.3%

Hispanic 23.1%

White/Caucasian 51.0%

Multiple ethnicity/Other 5.5%

Table D2

Responses on the x Questionnaire (N=100) < To be used with a Likert Scale Measure

Subscales Mean SD

Transformational Leadership 39.32 14.53

Transactional Leadership 17.79 6.16

Job Satisfaction 130.85 28.56

Retention R_1 4.51 1.82

R_2 2.93 1.83

R_3 3.01 1.74

R_4 3.55 1.87

R_5 4.40 1.66

R_6 3.54 1.79

R_7 4.31 1.73

R_8 4.64 1.49

R_9 4.07 1.81

R_10 2.93 1.83

RETENTION AND JOB SATISFACTION 43