The Love of Money Research around the World: Implications for HRD

1
The Love of Money Research around the World
Implications for HRD

• Thomas Li-Ping Tang
• Middle Tennessee State University, the USA
• AAhad M. Osman-Gani, Presenting Author
• Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
• 4th Asian Conference of the AHRD, Taipei, Taiwan,
• December 4-6, 2005

2

• TOTO SUTARSO, Middle Tennessee State University,
  USA,
• ADEBOWALE AKANDE, International Institute of
  Research, South Africa,
• MICHAEL W. ALLEN, Griffith University, Australia,
• ABDULGAWI SALIM ALZUBAIDI, Sultan Qaboos
  University, Oman,
• MAHFOOZ A. ANSARI, University Science Malaysia,
  Malaysia,
• FERNANDO ARIAS-GALICIA, National University of
  Mexico, Mexico,
• MARK G. BORG, University of Malta, Malta,
• LUIGINA CANOVA, University of Padua,, Italy,
• BRIGITTE CHARLES-PAUVERS, University of Nantes,
  France,
• BOR-SHIUAN CHENG, National Taiwan University,
  Taiwan,
• RANDY K. CHIU, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong
  Kong,
• IOANA CODOBAN, Babes-Bolyai University, Romania,
• LINZHI DU, Nanjing University, China,
• ILIA GARBER, Saratov State Social-Economic
  University, Russia,
• CONSUELO GARCIA DE LA TORRE, Technological
  Institute of Monterrey, Mexico,
• ROSARIO CORREIA HIGGS, Polytechnic Institute of
  Lisbon Portugal, Portugal,
• CHIN-KANG JEN, National Sun-Yat-Sen University,
  Taiwan,
• ALI MAHDI KAZEM, Sultan Qaboos University, Oman,
• KILSUN KIM, Sogang University, South Korea,

3

• VIVIEN KIM GEOK LIM, National University of
  Singapore, Singapore,
• ROBERTO LUNA-AROCAS, University of Valencia,
  Spain,
• EVA MALOVICS, University of Szeged, Hungary,
• ANNA MARIA MANGANELLI, University of Padua,
  Italy,
• ALICE S. MOREIRA, Federal University of Pará,
  Brazil,
• ANTHONY UGOCHUKWU O. NNEDUM, Nnamdi Azikiwe
  University, Nigeria,
• JOHNSTO E. OSAGIE, Florida A M University, USA,
• FRANCISCO COSTA PEREIRA, Polytechnic Institute of
  Lisbon Portugal, Portugal,
• RUJA PHOLSWARD, University of the Thai Chamber of
  Commerce, Thailand,
• HORIA D. PITARIU, Babes-Bolyai University,
  Romania,
• MARKO POLIC, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia,
• ELISAVETA SARDZOSKA, University St. Cyril and
  Methodius, Macedonia,
• ALLEN F. STEMBRIDGE, Southwestern Adventist
  University, USA,
• THERESA LI-NA TANG, Cendant Marketing Group,
  Brentwood, TN, USA,
• THOMPSON SIAN HIN TEO, National University of
  Singapore, Singapore,
• MARCO TOMBOLANI, University of Padua, Italy,
• MARTINA TRONTELJ, University of Ljubljana,
  Slovenia,
• CAROLINE URBAIN, University of Nantes, France,
• PETER VLERICK, Ghent University, Belgium

4
Outline

• The Meaning of Money
• The Love of Money
• The Love of Money Scale
• Method
• Results
• Discussion, Implications, Limitations

5
Money

• Money is the instrument of commerce and the
  measure of value (Smith, 1776/1937).
• Money has been used to attract, retain, and
  motivate their employees and achieve
  organizational goals around the world (Milkovich
  Newman, 2005).
• Money represents culture, history, values,
  location, political systems, and people.

6
The Meaning of Money

• The meaning of money is in the eye of the
  beholder (McClelland, 1967, p. 10).
• The meaning of money can be used as the frame of
  reference (Tang, 1992) in which people examine
  their everyday lives, such as pay satisfaction
  (Tang Chiu, 2003 Tang, Luna-Arocas, Sutarso,
  2005).

7
The Meaning of Money

• In the compensation literature, one construct
  that should not be overlooked is the meaning of
  money (Barber Bretz, 2000 45)

8
The Importance of Money

• Research shows that 49.9 of freshman in 1971
  said that the important reason in deciding to go
  on to college is to make more money.
• That number increased to 75.1 in 1993
• (The American Freshman, 1994).

9
The Importance of Money

• Among 10 Job Preferences (Jurgensen, 1978).
• Men ranked Pay the 5th
• Women ranked Pay the 7th
• Among 11 work goals, Pay was ranked
• The 1st in Germany
• The 2nd in Belgium, the UK, and the US and
• (Harpaz, 1990).

10
The Importance of Money

• In Hong Kong and China, most Chinese prefer cash
  among 35 components of compensation,
• The cash mentality (Chiu, Luk, Tang, 2001).

11
The Importance of Money

• The lack of money has become the number one cause
  of dissatisfaction among university students on
  campus for the past seven years (1997-2003), up
  from the third and the second place of two
  earlier periods (1990-1996, 1981-1987,
  respectively) (Bryan, 2004).

12
The Importance of Money

• Pay Dissatisfaction has numerous undesirable
  consequences (Heneman Judge, 2000 77)
• Turnover (Hom Griffeth, 1995 Tang, Kim,
  Tang, 2000),
• Low Commitment,
• Counterproductive Behavior (Cohen-Charash,
  Spector, 2001 Luna-Arocas Tang, 2004), and
• Unethical Behavior (e.g., Chen Tang, 2006
  Tang Chen, 2005 Tang Chiu, 2003).

13
The Love of Money

• The Love of Money has been used in everyday
  expression and popular literature.
• There is very little empirical research on this
  construct.

14
The Love of Money

• Many scholars consider the love of money
• as a taboo,
• a religious or controversial issue,
• not a scientific/academic issue, and
• to be excessively value-laden.
• Thereby, they may have great reluctance to study
  these issues.

15
The Oldest Reference

• People who want to get rich fall into temptation
  and a trap and into many foolish and harmful
  desires that plunge men into ruin and
  destruction. For the love of money is a root of
  all kinds of evil (Bible 1 Timothy, 6 9-10
  Tang Chiu, 2003).

16
The ABCs of Money Attitudes

• Affective Do you love or hate money?
• Behavioral What do you do with your money?
• Cognitive What does money mean to you?

17
The Love of Money Construct

1. Factor Rich (Affective)
2. Factor Motivator (Behavioral)
3. Factor Important (Cognitive)

18
I Want to be Rich

• The affective components of an attitude examine
  ones love and/or hate orientations, feelings, or
  emotions.
• I want to be Rich.
• Being rich is good. Rich is better than poor.
  Very few want to be poor.

19
Money Is a Motivator

• 4 Methods Improvement in Productivity
• Participation 0
• Job design 9
• Goal setting 16
• Contingent Pay 30
• No other incentive or motivational technique
  comes even close to money (Locke, Feren,
  McCaleb, Shaw, Denny, 1980 381)
• Money is a motivator (Stajkovic Luthans, 2001).
  
• Money is NOT a motivator (Herzberg, 1987).

20
Money Is Important

• Lucrative rewards of Wall Street and the high
  compensation attract the most talented people to
  the business field. Bok (1993), formal president
  of Harvard University
• Management professors (Gomez-Mejia Balkin,
  1992) Mental health workers change jobs (Tang,
  Kim, Tang, 2000).
• Money literature emphasis on its importance
  (Mitchell Mickel, 1999 569).

21
The Love of Money Scale

• Factor 1 Rich (Affective)
• 1. I want to be rich.
• 2. It would be nice to be rich.
• 3. Having a lot of money (being rich) is good.
• Factor 2 Motivator (Behavior)
• 4. I am motivated to work hard for money.
• 5. Money reinforces me to work harder.
• 6. I am highly motivated by money.
• Factor 2 Importance (Cognitive)
• 7. Money is good.
• 8. Money is important.
• 9. Money is valuable.

22
The Love of Money Is

• (1) ones wants, desires, and values of money,
• (2) ones attitudes toward money,
• (3) ones meaning of money,
• (4) not ones needs, greed, nor materialism
  (Belk, 1985),
• (5) a multi-dimensional individual difference
  variable, and
• (6) the combined notion of several constructs or
  factors (Du Tang, 2005 Luna-Arocas Tang,
  2004 Tang Chiu, 2003 Tang, Luna-Arocas,
  Sutarso, 2005)

23
Operational definition of the Love of Money

• This study does adopt a 9-item-3-factor Love of
  Money Scale, based on previous research (e.g.,
  Tang Chiu, 2003).
• The love of money is a higher-order (latent)
  construct with three sub-constructs (latent
  factors) Factors Rich, Motivator, and Important.

24
Measurement Invariance

• It does little good to test a theoretical and
  conceptual relationship across cultures unless
  there is confidence that the measures
  operationalizing the constructs of that
  relationship exhibit both conceptual and
  measurement equivalence across the comparison
  groups (Riordan Vandenberg, 1994, p. 645).

25
Measurement Invariance 9 Steps

1. an omnibus test of equality of covariance
   matrices across groups,
2. a test of configural invariance,
3. a test of metric invariance,
4. a test of scalar invariance,
5. a test of the null hypothesis that like items
   unique variances are invariant across groups,
6. a test of the null hypothesis that factor
   variances were invariant across groups,
7. a test of the null hypothesis that factor
   covariances were invariant across groups,
8. a test of the null hypothesis of invariant factor
   means across groups, and
9. other more specific test.

26
Measurement Invariance

• Vandenberg and Lance (2000) concluded that tests
  for configural and metric invariance were most
  often reported (p. 35).
• Configural invariancefactor structures
• Metric invariancefactor loadings

27
Method
The senior author recruited researchers in
approximately 50 geopolitical entities through
personal friends, contacts, or networking at
professional conferences Collaborators were
asked to collect data from 200 full-time
white-collar employees and managers in large
organizations.
28
31 Samples, N 6,498

• (1) Australia (n 262), (2) Belgium (201), (3)
  Brazil (201), (4) Bulgaria (162), (5) China-1
  (319 university students), (6) China-2 (204
  employees), (7) Egypt (200), (8) France (135),
  (9) Hong Kong (211), (10) Hungary (100), (11)
  Italy (204), (12) Macedonia (204), (13) Malaysia
  (200), (14) Malta (200), (15) Mexico (295), (16)
  Nigeria (200), (17) Oman (204), (18) Peru (192),
  (19) Philippines (200), (20) Portugal (200), (21)
  Romania (200), (22) Russia (200), (23)
  Singapore-1 (203), (24) Singapore-2 (336), (25)
  Slovenia (200), (26) South Africa (211), (27)
  South Korea (203), (28) Spain (183), (29) Taiwan
  (200), (30) Thailand (202), and (31) the USA
  (274).

29
Measure

• 58-item Money Ethic Scale (cf. Tang Tang, 2003)
  5-point Likert-type Scale
• strongly disagree (1),
• neutral (3) and
• strongly agree (5) as anchors.
• Participants completed the survey voluntarily and
  anonymously.

30
Evaluation criteria

• Cronbachs alpha alpha gt .70
• Measurement Invariance
• (1) configural invariance ?2/df lt 3.0, TLI gt
  .90, CFI gt .90, RMSEA lt .08 and
• (2) metric invariance (a) chi-square change
  (??2/?df) and (b) practical fit index change

31
(No Transcript)
32
Note. First, we eliminated 14 samples (printed in
bold) based on our rigorous criteria (?2/df lt
3.0, TLI gt .90, CFI gt .90, RMSEA lt .08) and
dropped 2 samples (bold and underlined) based on
low Cronbachs alpha (.70). Second, we eliminated
only 5 samples (bold) out of 31 Bulgaria,
Hungary, Malaysia, Malta, and Nigeria based on
less rigorous but acceptable criteria (?2/df lt 5,
TLI gt .90, CFI gt .90, RMSEA lt .10).
33
Configural Invariance

• First, we eliminated 14 samples (printed in bold)
  based on our rigorous criteria (?2/df lt 3.0, TLI
  gt .90, CFI gt .90, RMSEA lt .08) and dropped 2
  samples (bold and underlined) based on low
  Cronbachs alpha (.70). Second, we retained a
  sample if it satisfied ¾ of the following four
  reasonably rigorous and acceptable criteria for
  evaluating configural invariance (?2/df lt 5, TLI
  gt .90, CFI gt .90, RMSEA lt .10). We eliminated
  only 2 samples (bold) out of 31 Malta and
  Nigeria.

34
Metric Invariance

• The differences between unconstrained MGCFA (?2
  529.23, df 360, p .00, TLI 1.00, CFI
  1.00, RMSEA .01) and constrained MGCFA (?2
  867.43, df 444, p .00, TLI .99, CFI 1.00,
  RMSEA .02) was significant based on chi-square
  change (??2 338.20, ?df 84, p lt .05), but not
  significant based on fit index change (?CFI
  .00, n.s.).
• We have achieved metric (factor loadings)
  invariance.

35
Discussion, Implications, Limitations

• There was a good fit between our 9-item-3-factor
  Love of Money Scale (LOMS) and our whole sample
  involving 31 geopolitical entities.
• We achieved configural invariance in 15 samples
  using the most rigorous criteria
• We achieved configural invariance in 29 samples
  (our of 31) using less rigorous but acceptable
  criteria
• We achieved metric invariance in 15 samples using
  15 samples.

36
Implications--1

• Researchers should not take the measurement
  invariance for granted.
• Researchers need to systematically examine the
  assumption of stable and transferable measurement
  continua (Riordan Vandenberg, 1994 666).
• This study is an initial step in the
  cross-cultural validation of the Love of Money
  Scale.

37
Implications--2

• This study examines the love of money across
  samples and money is the focus of our
  attention.
• Researchers have to examine the wording or
  phrasing of items carefully when they design
  future measurement instruments (Riordan
  Vandenberg, 1994 667).

38
Implications--3

• Cronbachs alpha examines inter-item reliability
• Measurement invariance identifies equivalence
  across populations factor structure and factor
  loading.
• Both contribute to our understanding of the
  measurement instrument.

39
Implications--4

• One of the possible reasons of non-invariance is
  the composition of the samples.
• Malaysia and Singapore-2 samples have Chinese,
  Malay, Indian, and Caucasian.
• Singapore-1 sample has Chinese.
• The Nigeria sample has Igbo, Yoruba, Housa, and
  other ethnic groups.

40
Other Research

• The love of money is indirectly related to
  unethical behavior through Machiavellianism for
  Business students, male students, and male
  Business students, but not for Psychology
  students, female students, and female Psychology
  student.
• Tang and Chens results offer some hope regarding
  the efficacy of teaching business ethics in
  business school because Business students reduce
  significantly the propensity to engage in Theft
  from Time 1 to Time 2.

41
Implications

• Researchers and managers may have the potential
  to use the Love of Money Scale and the Propensity
  to Engage in Unethical Behavior Scale (Evil) as a
  personnel selection or an at-hire tool for
  money sensitive positions in organizations.
• Future research may also examine the impact of
  possible training (HRD) on the love of money and
  other constructs that, in turn, may enhance
  employees ethical behaviors in organizations.
  More research is needed in this direction.

42
Limitations

• First, there is no guarantee that the original
  meaning of these items is perfectly translated to
  the other languages.
• Second, we have collected data from full-time
  employees in these geopolitical entities.
  However, we do not have perfect control of many
  nuisance variables
• Third, our whole sample is reasonably large, but
  the sample from each geopolitical entity is quite
  small and does not represent a random sample or
  the average citizen of the geopolitical entity.
  We cannot generalize the findings to the whole
  population with full confidence.

43
Final Thoughts and Conclusions

• This study offers researchers some confidence and
  insights in using the Love of Money Scale.
• When researchers and practitioners apply the same
  tools consistently across organizations and
  geopolitical entities overtime, the cumulative
  results will enhance our abilities to understand,
  predict, and control the role of the love of
  money in organizations.

44
Thank You

• Danke
• Dankeshen
• Grazie
  
• Merci
• Muchas Gracias
• ??