5. Discussion of Findings, Conclusi

5. Discussion of Findings, Conclusion and Recommendations
One of the important questions in business has been why some organizations succeeded while others failed.
Organization performance has been the most important issue for every organization (both profit making and nonprofit
making ones). It has been very important for managers to know which factors influence an organization’s
performance in order for them to take appropriate steps to initiate them. Based on the above, this study examined
the relationship between organizational climate and corporate performance.

5.1. Relationship between Recognition and Profitability
The first hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between recognition of employee’s achievement and
organizational profitability. Hence it was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between
recognition and profitability. Data analysis however revealed a strong positive relationship between recognition
and organizational profitability (rho = 0.712). The finding supports the earlier finding of Mathisen and Einarsen,
(2004). Based on this finding it was concluded that recognition of employees’ achievements enhances
organizational profitability. Recognition involves the identification of the contributions of organizational
members in relation to the work they perform in a company. Most experienced workers appreciate recognition as
it gives them a sense of belonging and encourages them to work harder. Some employees are well experienced
and have attained much higher level on the job, and they are never motivated by pay and fringe benefits, but by
the recognition of their efforts (Mathisen and Einarsen, 2004). This is because they have the belief and attitude
to render the best service in accordance with the wealth of experience, skills, and knowledge they have attained
in their previous organizations (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991). Thus, when a worker’s effort is recognized he or she
feels motivated as motivation leads to improved productivity which ultimately leads to corporate profitability.

5.2. Relationship between Support and Profitability
The second hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between organizational support and corporate
profitability. Hence it was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between organizational support and corporate profitability. Data analysis however revealed a strong positive relationship between organizational
support and corporate profitability (rho = 0.744). The finding supports the earlier finding of (Litwin and Stinger,
1968). Based on this finding it was concluded that providing organizational support to employees enhances
corporate profitability. Organizational support is the degree of mutual help and co-operative support enjoyed by
organizational members in an organization (Baridam and Nwibere, 2008). Organizational support is the
perceived helpfulness of managers and co-workers, the emphasis (or lack of emphasis) on mutual support
(Litwin and Stinger, 1968). Organizational support is the perception of the degree to which superior members of
the organization tolerate members’ behavior, including willingness to let members learn from their mistakes
without fear of reprisal (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991). Thus, with absolute support from each and every member of
the organization, every task confronting the organization will be tackled mutually and with unity of purpose for
the realization of set corporate objectives.
5.3. Relationship between Cohesion and Profitability
The third hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between cohesion and corporate profitability. Hence it
was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between cohesion and corporate profitability. Data
analysis however revealed a strong positive relationship between cohesion and profitability (rho = 0.764). The
finding supports the earlier finding of Litwin and Stinger, (1968). Cohesion implies working in unity and
applying group efforts to achieve corporate goals (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991). Cohesion is concerned with
positive co-operation among organizational members, and it focuses on collective action which is based on the
shared meaning and understanding that individuals or groups have with one another (Litwin and Stinger, 1968).
The extent of collective action exhibited in an organization can motivate an employee to join that organization
because he or she will be pleased to add their contribution to the growth and survival of the said organization.
Cooperation comes with team work and mutual aid. Essentially, cooperation enhances the productive rate of
every organization as tasks can be completed faster for the enhancement of the profit level of the organization.
5.4. Relationship between Recognition and Market share
The fourth hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between recognition for achievement and
organizational market share. Hence it was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between
recognition for achievement and organizational market share. Data analysis however revealed a strong positive
relationship between recognition for employees achievement and organizational market share (rho= 0.703). This
finding corroborates the earlier finding of Litwin and Stinger, (1968). Recognition is the perception that an
organization accords its workers by the acknowledgement of their contributions (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991).
Under normal circumstances, members of an organization do have the feeling of being motivated as criteria for
them to seek for employment opportunities in organizations (Litwin and Stinger, 1968). The recognition given to
a worker goes a long way to motivate him or her to get to the extra mile in the discharge of productive work that
will enable the organization achieve set targets.
5.5. Relationship between Support and Market share
The fifth hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between organizational support and corporate market
share. Hence it was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between organizational support and
corporate market share. Data analysis however revealed a strong positive relationship between organizational
support and corporate market share (rho= 0.789). This finding provides support for the earlier finding of Smith,
(1994). Organizational support is concerned with how an organization provides the necessary means by which
corporate task can be accomplished effectively (Rose and Graffin, 2002). Organizational support also implies the
means by which assistance and encouragement are given to organizational members to succeed in the discharge
of their work (Smith, 1994). Thus, providing the necessary organizational support helps organizations and their
employees to render mutual aid to one another in the process of task accomplishment which may promote the
image of the organization and enhance market share in an effective and efficient manner.
5.6. Relationship between Cohesion and Market share
The sixth hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between cohesion and market share. Hence it was
hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between cohesion and market share. Data analysis however
revealed a strong positive relationship between cohesion and market share (rho= 0.751). This finding provides
support for the earlier finding of Koys and De Cotiis, (1991). Cohesion is concerned with the means of pooling
efforts together in unity. Most employees feel satisfied to contribute their tasks in corporations where there are
co-operation and collective efforts (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991). Cooperation comes with team work and mutual
aid. These factors enhances the productive rate of every organization as tasks can be completed faster for the
realization of efficient market share or any set targets of the organization. Thus, cohesion helps to make members of a particular organization channel their energy to one cause and execute it minimally without wasting
resources (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991).
5.7 Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusion above, the following recommendations were made: firstly, oil companies
should provide very conducive work environment that will recognize the work efforts of organizational members
in order to make them contribute positively to the attainment of the corporate objectives of the organizations.
Secondly, oil companies should develop policies that will promote collective work efforts that will make
organizational members support one another in the discharge of their duties. Collective efforts will enable the
organization to complete their task as and when due. Thirdly, oil companies should offer performance contingent
reward system to encourage organizational members put in their best for the achievement of set targets. Rewards
are means of motivating organizational members. It should be used to make employees to bring out their best
performance at the work place. It is expected that the reward system will improve productivity, and influence the
effective and efficient utilization of corporate resources to achieve corporate objectives. Fourthly, oil companies
should reward committed employees to promote loyalty. The workers in the oil companies should exhibit loyalty
and effective response to, and identification with the organization based on a sense of duty and responsibility..
The commitment of workers is needed to enable the organization attain its corporate objectives. Fifthly,
promotion of Trust in the work environment: oil companies should develop co-operation among their work
force so as to make them develop trust and unity in the work place for the achievement of set objectives. Trust
can be achieved when confidential matters affecting the progress of the organization are managed to the benefit
of the organization.

ผลลัพธ์ (ไทย) 1:

5. Discussion of Findings, Conclusion and RecommendationsOne of the important questions in business has been why some organizations succeeded while others failed.Organization performance has been the most important issue for every organization (both profit making and nonprofitmaking ones). It has been very important for managers to know which factors influence an organization’sperformance in order for them to take appropriate steps to initiate them. Based on the above, this study examinedthe relationship between organizational climate and corporate performance.5.1. Relationship between Recognition and ProfitabilityThe first hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between recognition of employee’s achievement andorganizational profitability. Hence it was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship betweenrecognition and profitability. Data analysis however revealed a strong positive relationship between recognitionand organizational profitability (rho = 0.712). The finding supports the earlier finding of Mathisen and Einarsen,(2004). Based on this finding it was concluded that recognition of employees’ achievements enhancesorganizational profitability. Recognition involves the identification of the contributions of organizationalmembers in relation to the work they perform in a company. Most experienced workers appreciate recognition asit gives them a sense of belonging and encourages them to work harder. Some employees are well experiencedได้บรรลุระดับสูงในงาน และพวกเขาไม่มีแรงจูงใจ โดยค่าจ้าง และสวัสดิการผลประโยชน์ แต่โดยการรับรู้ของความพยายามของพวกเขา (Mathisen และ Einarsen, 2004) ทั้งนี้เนื่องจากมีความเชื่อและทัศนคติการบริการตามประสบการณ์ ทักษะ และพวกเขาได้ความรู้มากมายในของพวกเขาก่อนหน้านี้องค์กร (Koys และเดอ Cotiis, 1991) ดังนั้น เมื่อความพยายามของผู้ปฏิบัติงานที่เป็นที่รู้จักเขาหรือเธอรู้สึกแรงจูงใจเป็นแรงจูงใจที่นำไปสู่ประสิทธิผลที่สุด นำไปสู่ผลกำไรขององค์กร5.2. ความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างการสนับสนุนและผลกำไรสมมติฐานที่สองพยายามที่จะตรวจสอบความสัมพันธ์ ระหว่างการสนับสนุนองค์กร และบริษัททำกำไร ดังนั้น มันถูกตั้งสมมติฐานว่าที่มีไม่ความสัมพันธ์อย่างมีนัยสำคัญระหว่างองค์กรสนับสนุนและผลกำไรขององค์กร วิเคราะห์ข้อมูลอย่างไรก็ตามการเปิดเผยความสัมพันธ์ในเชิงบวกที่ดีระหว่างองค์กรสนับสนุนและผลกำไรของบริษัท (ครอ = 0.744) ค้นหาการสนับสนุนค้นหาก่อนหน้านี้ (Litwin และ Stinger1968) ตามนี้จะถูกสรุปว่า องค์กรสนับสนุนให้พนักงานช่วยค้นหาผลกำไรขององค์กร สนับสนุนองค์กรคือ ระดับของการช่วยเหลือซึ่งกันและกันและร่วมมือสนับสนุนด้วยสมาชิกองค์กรในองค์กร (Baridam และ Nwibere, 2008) องค์กรสนับสนุนการประโยชน์ที่รับรู้ของผู้บริหาร และเพื่อนร่วมงาน เน้น (หรือขาดการเน้น) สนับสนุนซึ่งกันและกัน(Litwin และ Stinger, 1968) สนับสนุนองค์กรคือ การรับรู้ของระดับสมาชิกที่เหนือกว่าขององค์กรทนพฤติกรรมของสมาชิก รวมทั้งยินดีที่จะให้สมาชิกเรียนรู้จากความผิดพลาดของพวกเขาโดยไม่ต้องกลัวของ reprisal (Koys และเดอ Cotiis, 1991) ดังนั้น ด้วยการสนับสนุนแน่นอนจากสมาชิกทุก ๆจะถูกสำหรับองค์กร งานทุกองค์กรเผชิญซึ่งกันและกัน และความสามัคคีของวัตถุประสงค์สำหรับการรับรู้วัตถุประสงค์ขององค์กร5.3. ความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างสามัคคีและผลกำไรสมมติฐานที่ 3 พยายามที่จะตรวจสอบความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างสามัคคีและผลกำไรขององค์กร ดังนั้นจึงถูกตั้งสมมติฐานว่าการที่มีความสัมพันธ์อย่างมีนัยสำคัญไม่สามัคคีและผลกำไรขององค์กร ข้อมูลวิเคราะห์ความสัมพันธ์บวกแรงสามัคคีและผลกำไรที่เปิดเผยแต่ (ครอ = 0.764) ที่ค้นหาสนับสนุนการค้นหาก่อนหน้า Litwin และ Stinger, (1968) สามัคคีหมายถึงการทำงานความสามัคคี และใช้ความพยายามของกลุ่มเพื่อให้บรรลุเป้าหมายขององค์กร (Koys และเดอ Cotiis, 1991) สามัคคีเป็นเรื่องบวกความร่วมมือระหว่างสมาชิกในองค์กร และเน้นการดำเนินการรวมที่เป็นไปตามใช้ร่วมกันหมายถึง ความเข้าใจว่า บุคคลหรือกลุ่มมี ด้วยกัน (Litwin และ Stinger, 1968)ขอบเขตของการดำเนินการรวมจัดแสดงในองค์กรสามารถจูงใจพนักงานให้เข้าร่วมองค์กรbecause he or she will be pleased to add their contribution to the growth and survival of the said organization.Cooperation comes with team work and mutual aid. Essentially, cooperation enhances the productive rate ofevery organization as tasks can be completed faster for the enhancement of the profit level of the organization.5.4. Relationship between Recognition and Market shareThe fourth hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between recognition for achievement andorganizational market share. Hence it was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship betweenrecognition for achievement and organizational market share. Data analysis however revealed a strong positiverelationship between recognition for employees achievement and organizational market share (rho= 0.703). Thisfinding corroborates the earlier finding of Litwin and Stinger, (1968). Recognition is the perception that anorganization accords its workers by the acknowledgement of their contributions (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991).Under normal circumstances, members of an organization do have the feeling of being motivated as criteria forthem to seek for employment opportunities in organizations (Litwin and Stinger, 1968). The recognition given toa worker goes a long way to motivate him or her to get to the extra mile in the discharge of productive work thatwill enable the organization achieve set targets.5.5. Relationship between Support and Market shareThe fifth hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between organizational support and corporate marketshare. Hence it was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between organizational support andcorporate market share. Data analysis however revealed a strong positive relationship between organizationalsupport and corporate market share (rho= 0.789). This finding provides support for the earlier finding of Smith,(1994). Organizational support is concerned with how an organization provides the necessary means by whichcorporate task can be accomplished effectively (Rose and Graffin, 2002). Organizational support also implies themeans by which assistance and encouragement are given to organizational members to succeed in the dischargeof their work (Smith, 1994). Thus, providing the necessary organizational support helps organizations and theiremployees to render mutual aid to one another in the process of task accomplishment which may promote theimage of the organization and enhance market share in an effective and efficient manner.5.6. Relationship between Cohesion and Market shareThe sixth hypothesis sought to examine the relationship between cohesion and market share. Hence it washypothesized that there is no significant relationship between cohesion and market share. Data analysis howeverrevealed a strong positive relationship between cohesion and market share (rho= 0.751). This finding providessupport for the earlier finding of Koys and De Cotiis, (1991). Cohesion is concerned with the means of poolingefforts together in unity. Most employees feel satisfied to contribute their tasks in corporations where there areco-operation and collective efforts (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991). Cooperation comes with team work and mutualaid. These factors enhances the productive rate of every organization as tasks can be completed faster for therealization of efficient market share or any set targets of the organization. Thus, cohesion helps to make members of a particular organization channel their energy to one cause and execute it minimally without wastingresources (Koys and De Cotiis, 1991).5.7 RecommendationsBased on the findings and conclusion above, the following recommendations were made: firstly, oil companiesshould provide very conducive work environment that will recognize the work efforts of organizational membersin order to make them contribute positively to the attainment of the corporate objectives of the organizations.Secondly, oil companies should develop policies that will promote collective work efforts that will makeorganizational members support one another in the discharge of their duties. Collective efforts will enable theorganization to complete their task as and when due. Thirdly, oil companies should offer performance contingentreward system to encourage organizational members put in their best for the achievement of set targets. Rewardsare means of motivating organizational members. It should be used to make employees to bring out their best
performance at the work place. It is expected that the reward system will improve productivity, and influence the
effective and efficient utilization of corporate resources to achieve corporate objectives. Fourthly, oil companies
should reward committed employees to promote loyalty. The workers in the oil companies should exhibit loyalty
and effective response to, and identification with the organization based on a sense of duty and responsibility..
The commitment of workers is needed to enable the organization attain its corporate objectives. Fifthly,
promotion of Trust in the work environment: oil companies should develop co-operation among their work
force so as to make them develop trust and unity in the work place for the achievement of set objectives. Trust
can be achieved when confidential matters affecting the progress of the organization are managed to the benefit
of the organization.

ผลลัพธ์ (ไทย) 3:

5 . อภิปรายผลการวิจัย สรุปและข้อเสนอแนะ
หนึ่งในคำถามที่สำคัญในธุรกิจได้ ทำไมบางองค์กรทำสำเร็จในขณะที่คนอื่นล้มเหลว
สมรรถนะองค์การมีปัญหาที่สำคัญสำหรับทุกองค์กร ( ให้ทั้งกำไรและไม่แสวงหาผลกำไร
ทำให้คน ) มันสำคัญมากสำหรับผู้บริหารเพื่อทราบปัจจัยที่มีอิทธิพลต่อการเป็นองค์การ
ประสิทธิภาพเพื่อให้พวกเขาจะใช้ขั้นตอนที่เหมาะสมเพื่อเริ่มต้นพวกเขา ตามข้างต้น ศึกษา
ความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างบรรยากาศองค์การและผลการปฏิบัติงานขององค์กร

5.1 ความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างการรับรู้และความสามารถ
สมมติฐานแรกพยายามที่จะศึกษาความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างผลสัมฤทธิ์ทางการเรียนและการรับรู้ของพนักงาน
องค์การบริษัทดังนั้นจึงมีสมมติฐานว่า ไม่มีความสัมพันธ์ระหว่าง
รับรู้และผลกำไร การวิเคราะห์ข้อมูล แต่พบความสัมพันธ์ทางบวกที่แข็งแกร่งระหว่างการรับรู้
และองค์การกำไร ( โร = 0.712 ) การค้นหาและสนับสนุนก่อนหน้านี้ของแมไทเซิ่น einarsen
, ( 2547 )จากผลการวิจัยนี้สรุปได้ว่า การรับรู้ของพนักงานที่ช่วยเพิ่มอัตราความสำเร็จ
องค์การ . การรับรู้เกี่ยวกับการกำหนดเงินสมทบของสมาชิกองค์การ
ในความสัมพันธ์กับงานที่พวกเขาดำเนินการ ในบริษัท คนงานที่มีประสบการณ์มากที่สุดขอบคุณขณะที่
มันให้ความรู้สึกของการเป็นสมาชิกและกระตุ้นให้ทำงานหนักขึ้นพนักงานบางคนมีประสบการณ์ดี
และได้บรรลุระดับที่สูงมากในงานนี้ และพวกเขาจะไม่กระตุ้นโดยการจ่ายและผลประโยชน์ แต่โดย
ยอมรับความพยายามของพวกเขา ( แมไทเซิ่น และ einarsen , 2004 ) นี้เป็นเพราะพวกเขามีความเชื่อและทัศนคติ
ที่จะให้บริการที่ดีที่สุดตามความมั่งคั่งของประสบการณ์ทักษะ และความรู้ที่พวกเขาได้บรรลุ