International bankers' confidence in handling another global economic crisis

Chapter 4: Findings
The purpose of this quantitative descriptive study was to determine if the international banking community feels confident that it can sustain another global economic crisis, and specifically whether geopolitical awareness impacts that confidence level. Confidence plays a significant role in how money is invested, where it is placed, and what markets will do. Therefore, assessing the confidence levels of bankers at the four major international banks (J. P. Morgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, and Bank of China) is essential for understanding if the sector can safely handle another global economic crisis like that seen in 2007-2009. Additionally, the assessment of confidence levels can evaluate the degree of impact on and to what degree if at all geopolitical awareness. impacts that confidence level. Comment by Robin Butler: What type of study and design? Be sure it is the same from the chapter 3
This chapter comprises four sections: (a) validity and reliability of the data, (b) results, (c) evaluation of the findings, and (d) a summary of results. The validity and reliability of the data section will discuss the overall study, factors impacting the interpretation of the data collection or and analysis. The results section will provide, provides an overview of the categorical demographic data collected, and will comprise an illustration of factors related to the study. The evaluation of the findings will include an analysis of Likert scale data. Whereas, the summary of results will include……, the validity and reliability of the Likert-type data collected, and the assumptions of the validity and reliability tests used to analyze the Likert-type data collected. 
The research questions for this study are:
RQ1. Is the international banking community confident in its ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
IV: Having a position in the Banking Industry
DV: Confidence in handling a global economic crisis
Hypotheses
H0. There is no significant relationship between working in the banking community and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between working in the banking community and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.

RQ2. Does geopolitical awareness have an impact on the confidence of the members of the international banking community regarding the sector's ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
IV: Geopolitical awareness
DV: Confidence in handling a global economic crisis
Hypotheses
H0. There is no significant relationship between geopolitical awareness and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between geopolitical awareness and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.

RQ3. Do changes in central bank monetary policy (i.e., going from quantitative easing to quantitative tightening) and the awareness of the rising debt levels around the world affect the confidence levels of the members of the international banking community on the sectors ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one seen from 2007-2008?
IV: Awareness of monetary policy and debt levels
DV: Confidence in handling a global economic crisis
Hypotheses
H0. There is no significant relationship between awareness of monetary policy and debt levels and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between awareness of monetary policy and debt levels and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis

Validity and Reliability of the Data Comment by Robin Butler: This needs to be organized more. Comment by Robin Butler: 1.credibility- e.g., triangulation, member checks-https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10497323166548702. transferability-e.g., the extent to which the findings are generalizable to other situations3. dependability- e.g., an in-depth description of the methodology and design to allow the study to be repeated4. confirmability- e.g., the steps to ensure the data and findings are not due to participant and/or researcher bias
Transferability, which refers to external validity, the degree to which the study’s findings can be generalized among the larger population (Anney, 2014). Dependability indicates that a study is consistent throughout (Anney, 2014). Confirmability refers to the amount of confidence regarding the findings representing the participants’ perspective rather than the researcher’s (Anney, 2014). Reflexivity is when the researcher maintains a constant state of awareness of how his own ideas might be influencing the study. A reflexive journal can help to be mindful of this awareness, as can the audit trail, which acts as a record of how data was collected, analyzed and interpreted (Anney, 2014).
Dependability and confirmability can be addressed through detailed, thick descriptions of themes. , member-checks of the findings and interpretations, a reflexive journal kept by the researcher, and an inquiry audit done by a third party of the research processes used throughout the study.For this study, rich, thick descriptions were includedMeaning, , as was member checking. Aa reflexive journal was kept by the researcher, and an inquiry audit was completed by a third party to confirm that the research processes were used throughout the study (Marshall & Rossman, 2014). Validity concerns the accuracy of a measure, and reliability concerns the consistency of a measure. refers to the study’s ability to measure the outcomes that it aims to measure (Dikko, 2016). A valid study is one that is able to assess what it intends to assess and shows that the findings and conclusions proceed from the interpretation of the data in a logical way. It will explain the variables included for analysis and discuss potential variables that may not have been included. In presenting the findings, it is critical to discuss how accurate the collection of data and analysis reflect the reality of the information sought.  Comment by Robin Butler: This needs to be cited. With respect to this section, I would like for you to first briefly explain all (4) components with them being cited. Then, separate paragraphs below by the (4) major components as noted below:1.credibility- e.g., triangulation, member checks-https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10497323166548702. transferability-e.g., the extent to which the findings are generalizable to other situations3. dependability- e.g., an in-depth description of the methodology and design to allow the study to be repeated4. confirmability- e.g., the steps to ensure the data and findings are not due to participant and/or researcher biasI also included a few more articles to use for more support. You may use them to cite this part as well. So please ensure that the activities in this section are aligned to what is supposed to be done using all (4) components. For example, did you ensure “triangulation” during the credibility phase? Comment by Robin Butler: What does this mean? Explain more please.

Credibility. Triangulation of sources did not occur through the use ofusing a variety of data collection methods, but rather through the surveying of a variety of employees at four different international banks (J. P. Morgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, and Bank of China). This method allowed me to This allowed the researchers to at least obtain data from more than one source location within the international finance industry.
Member checking is the process of checking with participants after interpreting responses to make sure that what has been interpreted is what the participant intended to communicate (Marshall & Rossman, 2014). It was also used to answer questions that arose after the initial round of survey data was collected and analyzed. Participants were emailed or messaged through social media when the researcher had a question and wanted to confirm with the participants whether his interpretation of the findings aligned with their actual beliefs and feelings. Follow-up interviews or surveys with participants could perhaps help to answer that question, and member checking was utilized for that purpose.  Comment by Robin Butler: Explain and cite what member checking is first.
Emails were sent to the participants to gauge whether they viewed the role of the central bank in supporting markets as having a significant factor in their confidence in the industry overall. 

Member checking and triangulation both helped to ensure the credibility of the findings. However, validity concerns the accuracy of a measure, and reliability concerns the consistency of a measure. In presenting the findings, it is critical to discuss how accurate the collection of data and analysis reflect the reality of the information sought. 
Transferability. Transferability is the extent to which the findings are generalizeable to other situations. This study did not include a mixed-methods approach, but rather only multiple data sources, and thus it did not offer a triangulation of sources beyond the banking members who participated in the survey of the four central banks. This lack of triangulation places at least one constraint on the validity of the data in the sense that it means the findings are not tested for consistency across different data collection instruments. There may be other factors and variables not tested in this study influencing or affecting the outcome.  Comment by Robin Butler: transferability- e.g., the extent to which the findings are generalizable to other situations Comment by Robin Butler: Explain this more.
Transferability was however, ensured assured by providing detailed, thick descriptions of the way data was collected, the context in which it was obtained, demographics of the participants, and other content that would help to deepen the understanding of the population represented by the findings. .(Marshall & Rossman, 2014). Comment by Robin Butler: Does this need to be cited??????
Dependability. Ensuring consistency throughout, the study’s audit trail shows that there are factors that impact the interpretation of the data collection or analysis. The overall study showed that the data met the assumptions of the statistical test. Evidence of psychometric soundness in terms of adequate validity and reliability was obtained through Pearson's r and internal consistency, face validity, test for normality, and discriminant validity.  Generalizeability of the findings may not apply to other situations outside the international banking industry because of the unique situation that is international banking and the unique role that variables play in impacting the participants’ sense of confidence, as the findings show. Comment by Robin Butler: dependability- e.g., an in-depth description of the methodology and design to allow the study to be repeated Comment by Robin Butler: Please further vet to ensure that the content supports the “extent” to which the findings are generalizable to other situations. You may want to provide the actual calculation used. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKHPmGn0E3QList what type of analysis or test you conducted to test each hypothesis. Refer to your Statistics textbook for the proper way to report results in APA style. A t-test, for example, is reported in the following format: t (18) = 3.57, p < .001, where 18 is the number of degrees of freedom (N – 2 for an independent-groups t test). For a correlation: r (32) = -.52, p < .001, where 32 is the number of degrees of freedom (N – 2 for a correlation). For a one-way ANOVA: F (2, 18) = 7.00, p < .001, where 2 represents the between and 18 represents df within Remember that if a finding has a p value greater than .05, it is “nonsignificant,” not “insignificant.” For nonsignificant findings, still provide the exact p values. For correlations, be sure to report the r2 value as an assessment of the strength of the finding, to show what proportion of variability is shared by the two variables you’re correlating. For t- tests and ANOVAs, report eta2 . Report exact p values to two or three decimal places (e.g., p = .042; see p. 114 of APA manual). However, for p-values less than .001, simply put p < .001. Following the presentation of all the statistics and numbers, be sure to state the nature of your finding(s) in words and whether or not they support your hypothesis (e.g., “As predicted …”). This information can typically be presented in a sentence or two following the numbers (within the same paragraph). Also, be sure to include the relevant means and SDs. It may be useful to include a table or figure to represent your results visually. Be sure to refer to these in your paper (e.g., “As illustrated in Figure 1…”). Remember that you may present a set of findings either as a table or as a figure, but not as both. Make sure that your text is not redundant with your tables/figures. For instance, if you present a table of means and standard deviations, you do not need to also report these in the text. However, if you use a figure to represent your results, you may wish to report means and standard deviations in the text, as these may not always be precisely ascertained by examining the figure. Do describe the trends shown in the figure. Do not spend any time interpreting or explaining the results; save that for the Discussion section.See here: https://www.hamilton.edu/documents/How%20to%20Write%20an%20APA%20Style%20Research%20Paper1.pdf
Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha.  Internal consistency reliability was supported: Cronbach's alpha was .80.  Data analysis appropriate for the purpose and design would be: Internal consistency, Construct validity, and Item homogeneity. The following were tested: reliability and item homogeneity using Cronbach's alpha, item-total correlations, and inter-item correlations; construct validity using factor analysis. Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, which tells how closely items in a group are related. Internal consistency reliability was supported: Cronbach's alpha was .80, which indicates that the items had a relatively high degree of internal consistency. In the scientific community, the reliability coefficient > .70 is typically viewed as acceptable. Tests for normality were conducted on the dependent variable.  Comment by Robin Butler: Please illustrate with the use of tables or calculations to support what was done to ensure dependability. Comment by Robin Butler: As noted in the previous comment, please be explicit in how you report:See here: https://www.hamilton.edu/documents/How%20to%20Write%20an%20APA%20Style%20Research%20Paper1.pdf
Though the Shapiro-Wilk test indicated a significant deviation from normality (.99, p < 0.5), a visual inspection of the histogram was conducted, and this showed a normal distribution. 
Kurtosis and skewness were also within the 1.96 limitations (.12 for kurtosis and .11 for skewness), and this was further evidence that the departure from normality indicated in the Shapiro-Wilk test was not too extreme. 
In statistical tests, parametric testing assumptions have tomust be followed for accurate interpretation. Assumptions of normality, i.e., the distribution of the test, should be normally distributed with a symmetric bell-shaped curve. Skewness and kurtosis can test the assumption of normality, where skewness should be within the range ±2, and kurtosis values should be within the range of ±7. Shapiro-Wilk's test should not be significant. In this study, it showed significant but visual inspection of the bell curve showed otherwise.
ANOVAa

Model
Sum of Squares
Mean Square
F
Sig.

1
Regression
57.875
28.937
.611
.547b


Residual
2082.370
47.327




Total
2140.245




a. Dependent Variable: Confidence

b. Predictors: (Constant), Crisis perception



The assumptions of the Pearson correlation test were negligible and included linearity. The assumptions of the t-test included random sampling, normality of data distribution, adequacy of sample size, and equality of variance in standard deviation. A total of 1000 emails were sent to a randomized sample of employees at J. P. Morgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, and Bank of China, asking them to participate in a survey hosted on SurveyMonkey page. A total of 641 participants took part in the survey.
Confirmability. The survey method is most often used in quantitative studies, and the most current survey is the self-reported survey. Surveys can be elaborate or simple but are most frequently used to obtain data from a population regarding a research question that focuses on the correlation of variables or issues of cause and effect (Walliman, 2017). The survey is conducted by first developing the survey questions or statements. Usually, the Likert scale is used to make measuring responses easier. The Likert scale is a numbered scale of responses that indicate the degree to which the responder agrees or disagrees with a statement in the survey. When developing a survey, the researcher must be careful that the statements are written in a way that the responses can be adequately measured using such a scale. Otherwise, the data can be misleading—for instance, if with one statement, a high value is given to responses that agree with statements that are positive towards the phenomenon in question. However, in another statement, a high value is given to responses that agree with statements that are negative towards the phenomenon in question, the survey data results will be worthless (Nardi, 2018). Thus, the survey should be piloted first to make sure it is valid. This survey was piloted with the first five participants. The desired information was obtained from the surveys and member checking was conducted with the participants to ensure that the interpretation of the data aligned with what the participants meant to express. The advantages of the survey are that it is an easy way to collect information from a large group of participants without having to meet them all or interview them. A survey can be mass-distributed quickly and quickly taken without inconveniencing the participant. The disadvantages of the survey method are that self-reporting can lead to underreporting, which can negatively impact the validity and generalizability of the survey and the study overall.   Comment by Robin Butler: Need to cite Comment by Robin Butler: Cite and support here. Comment by Robin Butler: Was this piloted? If so, how was it done? Who was involved, etc. You need to start discussing the process of piloting the survey here. I am assuming that you included all this background on surveys in preparation for the pilot’s use. Please clear up here.
Results
The results will address the following research questions and hypothesis: Comment by Robin Butler: Bring the RQ and hypothesis here as well.
RQ1. Is the international banking community confident in its ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
IV: Having a position in the Banking Industry
DV: Confidence in handling a global economic crisis
Hypotheses
H0. There is no significant relationship between working in the banking community and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between working in the banking community and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.

RQ2. Does geopolitical awareness have an impact on the confidence of the members of the international banking community regarding the sector's ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
IV: Geopolitical awareness
DV: Confidence in handling a global economic crisis
Hypotheses
H0. There is no significant relationship between geopolitical awareness and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between geopolitical awareness and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.

RQ3. Do changes in central bank monetary policy (i.e., going from quantitative easing to quantitative tightening) and the awareness of the rising debt levels around the world affect the confidence levels of the members of the international banking community on the sectors ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one seen from 2007-2008?
IV: Awareness of monetary policy and debt levels
DV: Confidence in handling a global economic crisis
Hypotheses
H0. There is no significant relationship between awareness of monetary policy and debt levels and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between awareness of monetary policy and debt levels and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis

           The research questions for this study were:
1) Is the international banking community confident in its ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
2) Does geopolitical awareness have an impact on the confidence of the members of the international banking community regarding the sector's ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
3) Do changes in central bank monetary policy (i.e., going from quantitative easing to quantitative tightening) and the awareness of the rising debt levels around the world affect the confidence levels of the members of the international banking community on the sectors ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one seen from 2007-2008?
The findings indicated that there was no lack of confidence in general among employees of the international banking industry. They likewise showed that geopolitical awareness does not have a statistically significant negative effect on international banking employees' confidence levels. Thirdly, the findings showed that awareness of monetary policy and rising debt levels does not significantly impact in a negative way the confidence of these same employees.


Discussion
This study has built on the idea that confidence plays a significant role in how money is invested. Everything from bond markets to equities markets to precious metals and blockchain is impacted by confidence (Haitsma et al., 2016). Banks should, therefore, have some sense of confidence levels in case another financial and economic crisis occurs. To assist in this discernment, this study provides a convenient tool for assessing confidence levels and providing a reading on the confidence of the associates of four major international banks.  Comment by Robin Butler: Omit and save for chapter 5
The demographics of participants consisted of sales specialists (39%), loan processors (22%), financial advisors (16%), investment banking analysts (15%), application analysts (5%), executive directors (3%), and risk analysts (2%), as shown in Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the independent and dependent variables are shown in Table 2.

Table 1
Demographics of Respondents
Job Position
Percentage of Respondents

Application Analyst
5%

Investment Banking Analyst
15%

Executive Director
3%

Risk Analyst
2%

Loan Processor
22%

Financial Advisor
16%

Sales Specialist
39%



Most of the participants in the survey were in sales, which is considered a lower-level position. Loan processors made up the next highest level of participants, followed by financial advisors. Risk analysts made up only 2% of the respondents and executive directors only 3%. This could be a factor in skewing the results of the survey, which is aware of any association between risk-adversity and geopolitical awareness or confidence. Considering that the majority of those surveyed were involved in sales and loan processing, it was expected that the data would naturally reflect a more positive view of the strength of the international finance industry, considering that these individuals’ jobs and careers depended on industry-wide strength. 
Were it the case that factors such as geopolitics and increasing-debt levels at record highs could undermine the industry, it would present the possibility that the industry itself was fundamentally lacking in inherent strength.strengthT. To assess these relationships, however, it is essential to consider the data in terms of the research questions asked at the outset of this study. Comment by Robin Butler: Let’s clear this sentence up a little. Please rephrase for a clear presentation. Let me share a good self-editing tool: https://app.grammarly.com/
Research Question 1
Is the international banking community confident in its ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
H0. There is no significant relationship between working in the banking community and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between working in the banking community and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.

  Table 2 shows that in the international banking community, the most confidence was expressed by HSBC employees and the Bank of China, concerning the community’s determination to handle a global economic crisis. Employees of JP Morgan-Chase were overwhelmingly neutral-to-confident, however, and were by far the least concerned group of employees about difficulties that might be faced by another crisis. The recurring theme found in the survey responses was that employees felt that their banks were more prepared to handle another crisis. Here, the outlier was Deutsche Bank, where employees expressed very little confidence, with three out of four participants demonstrating a substantial lack of confidence in the industry’s ability to cope with another crisis. Employees at Deutsche Bank expressed minimal impression of the banks being prepared for what would happen. Of the four banks, employees at the Bank of China were the most optimistic, with only 5% of participants expressing a lack of confidence.

Table 2
Confidence levels of the Banking Community


Confidence


Bank
Not Confident
Neutral
Confident

JPMorgan-Chase
10%
50%
40%

Deutsche
75%
5%
20%

HSBC
25%
10%
65%

Bank of China
5%
35%
60%

Mean
28.75%
25%
46.2%



There did not appear to be any statistically significant correlation between the two variables regarding confidence and crisis perception. The p-value was more significant than 0.05, and thus, the null hypothesis was rejected.To test the assumptions of linearity, Pearson’s r and regression analysis were conducted using ANOVA.Pearson’s r for the data obtained was +.95, which indicates excellent reliability. The t-test p-value was above 0.05 for each of the three research questions, indicating that the null hypotheses for each should be rejected.
Model Summaryb

Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate

1
.164a
.027
-.017
6.8794

a. Predictors: (Constant), Crisis perception

b. Dependent Variable: Confidence




ANOVAa

Model
Sum of Squares
Mean Square
F
Sig.

1
Regression
57.875
28.937
.611
.547b


Residual
2082.370
47.327




Total
2140.245




a. Dependent Variable: Confidence

b. Predictors: (Constant), Crisis perception




Residuals Statisticsa


Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
N

Predicted Value
4.295
9.089
7.511
1.1217
641

Residual
-7.9074
31.5980
.0000
6.7282
641

Std. Predicted Value
-2.867
1.416
.000
1.000
641

Std. Residual
-1.147
4.791
.000
.968
641

a. Dependent Variable: Confidence


The findings showed that the model was not statistically significant, as p > 0.05. The R-squared is less than 3%, and therefore not so not a good predictor. The correlation between the variables was not especially meaningful.
Thus, aside from the outlier of employees at Deutsche Bank, there was no significant indication of an industry-wide lack of confidence among employees in the industry of international finance or correlation between perceptions of crises in the past and projections of fears for the future.
Possible explanations for this lack of association could be that employees believed their employers had implemented the appropriate controls and policies in the wake of the 2008 crisis and that they were now better prepared to handle risk and volatility. Though this survey was conducted before the March 2020 market volatility related to the global spread of coronavirus, the rapid bounce-back of the market over a matter of weeks suggests that the employees of these firms were possibly justified in their confidence that their institutions would be able to handle any volatility with relative ease. Comment by Robin Butler: Save for chapter 5. Omit. We are just presenting findings here. Please focus on what was presented, not what it means.
One caveat in this explanation, however, is the role of the central banks of the world in injecting liquidity into markets through a variety of different maneuvers, such as the purchasing of high yield junk bonds by the Federal Reserve and the outright purchasing of equities by the Bank of Japan. In response to the COVID 19 crisis, central banks injected 10 trillion+ USD into markets. Did employees of these firms suspect that central banks would be there to support markets as they were following 2008? Was this the source of their trust?Follow-up interviews or surveys with participants could perhaps help to answer that question, and member checking was utilized for that purpose. 
Emails were sent to the participants to gauge whether they viewed the role of the central bank in supporting markets as having a significant factor in their confidence in the industry overall. 
The overwhelming response of replies was affirmative, with 90% of respondents (240 total) stating that, yes, their impressions that the central banks would step in to bring stability to the market place and thereby to the international finance industry was the source of their confidence, since the central banks had set a precedent for precisely that type of activity in their response to the 2008 economic crisis. Comment by Robin Butler: Chapter 5

Research Question 2 Comment by Robin Butler: Remember to include the updated hypothesis throughout this section as it is applicable.
Does geopolitical awareness have an impact on the confidence of the members of the international banking community regarding the sector's ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
H0. There is no significant relationship between geopolitical awareness and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between geopolitical awareness and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.

Throughout the international banking community, the employees of Deutsche Bank were most likely to be negatively impacted by awareness of geopolitical events, as can be seen in Table 3. Deutsche employees’ awareness of geopolitical stressors, such as the threat of an Iranian crisis, oil embargoes, the rise of domestic and international terrorism, or a new Cold War with Russia, all tended to linger in their minds in a negative way more than in the minds of employees of other banks. For other bank employees, geopolitical tension was seen as “bullish” for markets, as it created a heightened understanding of macro factors that could help investors to understand better where to move money, what to invest in, what flows to follow, and what risks to consider. For at least half of employees at JP Morgan-Chase, HSBC, and Bank of China, geopolitical awareness was positively correlated with confidence because these employees felt that by understanding geopolitical issues, their bank was better situated to provide expert advice and guidance for their clients. For three-fourths of employees at Deutsche Bank, awareness of geopolitics did not inspire confidence but rather fear and dread. One explanation for this could be that these employees did not trust their firm to be able to navigate the fallout of geopolitical tension and conflict.  Comment by Robin Butler: Ch. 5
The question that arose, therefore, was whether employees’ confidence in their own firm moderated their confidence in their industry overall. Since the majority of employees in the community demonstrated a positive impact on confidence, as geopolitical awareness grew, it seemed necessary to engage in member checking once more and follow-up the survey with an additional question to participants that was put in the context of COVID 19. From the survey, the questions was:: Do you feel confident in your firm’s ability to navigate the fallout from geopolitical conflict created by the conditions caused by the coronavirus pandemic? 152 respondents answered, and 82% of them stated that they were confident in their firms.  Comment by Robin Butler: Was these one of the questions from the survey? If so, this needs to be indicated.
Of the 18% who did not express confidence, 75% were employees of Deutsche Bank. This suggests that Deutsche Bank is different from its peers in the industry, at least in terms of how employees perceive the company and its internal strength.
The key insight from this finding is that the firm’s reputation can impact employee perceptions of how to interpret geopolitical risk. If a firm’s reputation is strong, employees are more likely to consider geopolitical awareness in terms of how they can use to benefit clients and their firms and thus themselves. If a firm’s reputation is weak, employees are more likely to fear the fallout of geopolitical conflict and how it might impact their firm negatively and, thus, in turn, impact their careers. This suggests that banks that lack internal strength or that are plagued by an exodus of shareholders as Deutsche Bank has been in the past are less likely to have employees who believe that geopolitical awareness is something that they can use in their favor to assist clients. Instead, they view any type of global tension or conflict as inherently risky and harmful for the industry because they fear the impact it could have on weak firms like their own. Employees who view their firms as strong, on the other hand, will use geopolitical awareness with confidence because they are not worried that their own company may be adversely impacted by global conflict, and for that reason, they are more inclined to embrace geopolitical risk or turmoil and use that understanding to help clients make the right investments or take out the right loans at the right time. Nearly half of all employees participating in the survey felt that geopolitical awareness gave them more confidence, not less, and almost three-fourths of all employees felt that at the very least, it had no negative impact on their confidence levels regarding the industry as a whole, as Table 3 shows. Comment by Robin Butler: Save for ch 5

Table 3
The Impact of Geo-Political Awareness on Confidence Levels


Impact


Bank
Negative Impact
No Impact
Positive Impact

JPMorgan-Chase
5%
45%
50%

Deutsche
75%
5%
20%

HSBC
25%
10%
65%

Bank of China
5%
35%
60%

Mean
27.5%
23.75%
48.75%



Still, there did not appear to be any statistically significant correlation between the two variables regarding confidence and geopolitical awareness. The p-value was more significant than 0.05, and thus the null hypothesis was rejected.
To test the assumptions of linearity, Pearson’s r and regression analysis were conducted using ANOVA.

Model Summaryb

Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate

1
.159a
.022
-.019
6.4793

a. Predictors: (Constant), Geopolitical awareness

b. Dependent Variable: Confidence




ANOVAa

Model
Sum of Squares
Mean Square
F
Sig.

1
Regression
56.692
28.937
.611
.547b


Residual
2082.370
47.327




Total
2140.245




a. Dependent Variable: Confidence

b. Predictors: (Constant), Geopolitical awareness





Residuals Statisticsa


Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
N

Predicted Value
4.262
9.098
7.511
1.4566
641

Residual
-7.946
32.696
.0000
6.6512
641

Std. Predicted Value
-2.867
1.415
.0000
1.0000
641

Std. Residual
-1.146
4.582
.0000
.9690
641

a. Dependent Variable: Confidence


The findings showed that the model as a whole waswas not statistically significant, as p > 0.05. The R-squared is less than 3%, so not a good predictor of where confidence will be. The correlation between the variables was not especially meaningful in spite of the fact thatalthoughthe majority ofmany respondents associated geopolitical awareness with confidence rather than with a weakening of confidence. Comment by Robin Butler: Do not end with propositions. Correct throughout.What is a PROPOSITION? Do you mean PREPOSITION? If so, WILL BE is not a PREPOSITIONAL phrase.
 Research Question 3
Do changes in central bank monetary policy (i.e., going from quantitative easing to quantitative tightening) and the awareness of the rising debt levels around the world affect the confidence levels of the members of the international banking community on the sectors ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one seen from 2007-2008?
H0. There is no significant relationship between awareness of monetary policy and debt levels and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis.
H1. There is a significant relationship between awareness of monetary policy and debt levels and confidence that the industry can handle another economic crisis

The data indicate that awareness of central bank policy and rising debt levels has no significant impact on bank employees’ confidence levels. Table 4 shows the effect of awareness of central bank monetary policy and increasing debt levels on confidence levels of bankers. Again, employees of Deutsche represent the least confident group, and J.P Morgan Chase employees demonstrated the most neutrality. The HSBC and Bank of China employees demonstrateda positive correlation between awareness of the variables and confidence, though neither was statistically significant.One possible explanation for the positive correlation is that bankers at these firms again viewed awareness itself in positive terms rather than in negative terms. 
The idea that awareness can enhance relationships between bankers and clients is a theme that occurred again and again in the survey responses. Instead of seeing rising debt and central bank interventions as foreboding events heralding a major economic crisis, these bank employees saw awareness as something that they could use to help clients make the right decisions for themselves. By being aware of these events, catalysts, and signals sales specialists, financial advisors, loan processors, investment banking analysts, and risk analysts could feel more confident in their own ability to do their banking duties. They responded that they could help clients feel informed, knowledgeable, helpful, and confident in their own decisions about how to invest, whether to take out a loan at a specific interest rate or what types of financial products to buy. 
However, this type of confidence was not shared by all bank employees. Three-fourths of employees at JP Morgan-Chase felt that awareness of central bank monetary policy and rising debt levels played no part in how their confidence was formed. One reason for the lack of impact among JP Morgan-Chase employees might be found in JP Morgan-Chase’s own organizational culture and risk aversion strategies that were being implemented under the guidance of Jamie Dimon. Dimon himself was critical of the amount of rising debt and the role that the central bank was playing via monetary policy in the tightening of credit. Deutsche employees were by far the most negatively impacted by this awareness, with nearly one in two employees of the German firm feeling that their confidence in the international banking industry was shaken by the rising global debt and the monetary policy of central banks around the world. The question that remained was whether employees of Deutsche felt shaken in confidence by this awareness because they believed their bank lacked internal strength and that all banks were like their firm or whether it was some other reason. Comment by Robin Butler: Do not use real names. That’s the CEO’s name. He is a public figure. Do you even know what you are reading?
A post-survey question was put to these employees using member checking, and the employees who responded (74 total) answered that they saw little long-term reason to be confident in the system period as free markets, especially now in light of the response to the COVID 19 crisis, were fast resembling a command economy. Of the participants who reported being shaken in their confidence, the loss of a free market was the most cited concern followed by a concern about a collapse in USD and a default on sovereign debt that would totally upend the system and lead to open conflict and a global hot war among nations. This was one extreme of feeling among a minority population of bank employees. The more common feeling among the majority ofmost employees was that monetary policy and rising debt had either no effect or else a positive effect on their confidence levels.
Table 4
The Effect of Central Bank Monetary Policy and Awareness of Increasing Debt Levels on Confidence Levels


Effect


Bank
Negative Effect
No Impact
Positive Impact

JPMorgan-Chase
15%
75%
10%

Deutsche
45%
25%
30%

HSBC
25%
10%
65%

Bank of China
5%
35%
60%

Mean
22.5%
36.25%
41.25%




There did not appear to be any statistically significant correlation between the two variables regarding confidence and awareness of debt levels rising/central bank monetary policy. The p-value was more significant than 0.05, and thus, the null hypothesis was rejected.
To test the assumptions of linearity, Pearson’s r and regression analysis were conducted using ANOVA.
Model Summaryb

Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate

1
.141a
.023
-.016
6.6831

a. Predictors: (Constant), Awareness of central banking monetary policy and increasing debt levels around the world

b. Dependent Variable: Confidence




ANOVAa

Model
Sum of Squares
Mean Square
F
Sig.

1
Regression
53.875
28.535
.642
.539b


Residual
2062.862
46.345




Total
2162.182




a. Dependent Variable: Confidence

b. Predictors: (Constant), Awareness of central banking monetary policy and increasing debt levels around the world




Residuals Statisticsa


Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
N

Predicted Value
4.295
9.099
7.511
1.121
641

Residual
-7.907
31.598
.000
6.728
641

Std. Predicted Value
-2.867
1.416
.000
1.000
641

Std. Residual
-1.149
4.593
.000
.978
641

a. Dependent Variable: Confidence





The findings showed that the model was not statistically significant, as p > 0.05. 
he R-squared is less than 3%, so not a good predictor. The correlation between the variables was not especially meaningful. Thus, despite the associations that could be drawn, statistical significance was not found. Interpretations of the data could not be, therefore, corroborated or supported by quantitative statistical analysis. In the end, the data suggests that more inquiry is required, either to explore further variables that might be factored in affecting confidence or to understand better the viewpoints of employees of these banks and what they perceive to be directly influencing their confidence.
Evaluation of the Findings
Research Question 1
Is the international banking community confident in its ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?The bankers surveyed at J.P. Morgan Chase and Bank of China were by far the most optimistic of the participants surveyed, while Deutsche employees were least optimistic in terms of their view on the strength of the industry. Overall, there did not appear to be any statistical significance, though some consistency among patterns of responses among individual participants from certain banks could be identified. In terms of confidence, employees who displayed the most worked for firms that were solidly established and whose share price had not been adversely affected in recent years by a declining reputation the way Deutsche Bank's had been. 
It is possible, therefore, that a lack of sense of security might be at play for employees whose confidence was negatively impacted by the thought of an economic crisis. The rational choice theory would suggest that employees who did feel shaken by the thought of navigating another economic crisis we're experiencing a loss of confidence because the data they were inputting indicated a likely negative future for themselves. From a mission command perspective, they might be seen asbe the ones who would seek to adapt and find an alternative path forward. An interesting investigation that might be pursued on this point is whether turnover rates are high among employees who reported that their confidence was lacking at the thought of facing another economic crisis. This could be determined by surveying respondents' intentions to stay. The question was not put to respondents, but the findings do suggest that it may be a future inquiry point worth pursuing.
Another consideration, however, may be to apply Maslow's theory of motivation to the matter and using a different theoretical framework for interpreting the data. For what if rational choice theory and the concept of mission command only partially explain the findings? Maslow's theory of human motivation plays an equally important role in understanding the data?data. Here may be the key to further unlocking the meaning of the data. An investigation into whether employees with a lack of confidence have their lower-level needstheir lower-level needs have met could be revealing and help with future analysis.
Research Question 2
Does geopolitical awareness impact the confidence of the members of the international banking community regarding the sector's ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one experienced from 2007-2008?
The findings here were mixed. Geopolitical awareness shook the confidence of some and bolstered the confidence of others. The reasons given revealed two concurrent themes: on the one hand, awareness helped already confident bank employees to feel even more confident because they saw themselves as more informed and, therefore, better able to assist clients in making right investment decisions. 
Those who were already lacking in confidence were made less confident if they considered geopolitical risk factors as well, for they saw these risks as a threat to their own job security. One explanation for this feeling was that they simply did not trust their bank to be able to withstand geopolitical tremors that might spread around the world should the conflict escalate and roil markets and economies simultaneously. The revealing finding here was that employees who lacked confidence were made even less confident by awareness, and employees who were confident in their banks were made more confident in their awareness of geopolitics. Some who demonstrated geopolitical awareness and could appreciate the risk that geopolitics held for markets expressed more confidence in their banks to be able to withstand any stressors as well as confidence in themselves to be able to guide clients and perform their duties based upon their knowledge. However, in spite ofdespite these associations and correlations, there was no statistically significant correlation among the variables, and the null hypothesis was rejected once more. Nonetheless, the patterns of responses among employees indicate that themes for future exploration do exist and might be positively pursued.
Research Question 3
Do changes in central bank monetary policy (i.e., going from quantitative easing to quantitative tightening) and the awareness of the rising debt levels around the world affect the confidence levels of the members of the international banking community on the sectors ability to handle another global economic crisis like the one seen from 2007-2008?
The same pattern of confidence was found in response to this research question as in the other two: those bank employees who were confident in their firm and in themselves were not negatively impacted by awareness of monetary policy and rising debt levels. They saw awareness as a positive rather than as a negative even if the facts that they were aware of could be perceived as negative. The individuals who had confidence saw information as a tool that they could use to be better at their jobs, whether that were selling financial instruments to clients or analyzing loans. If they trusted the industry, the regulations in place, their firms, and themselves, they were not put off by dire reports of rising debt or ill effects of policy errors by committed by central banks.  
On the other hand, if employees did not have that level of confidence and did not have a high level of trust in their firm or in the industry, negative reports of potential policy error related to central banks' monetary policy and rising debt levels were found to exacerbate their fears further and reduce their confidence still lower. Employees of Deutsche represented the least confident group, and J.P Morgan Chase employees demonstrated the most neutrality. In contrast, HSBC and Bank of China employees demonstrated a positive correlation between awareness of the variables and confidence, though neither was statistically significant. Overall, there was no statistically significant correlation between awareness of debt levels and confidence, and therefore the null hypothesis was rejected a third time. Nonetheless, the associations between workers of the firm with the declining reputation and share price were overall less confident than their peers at firms perceived to have a stronger reputation. This suggests that there may be more to the issue of confidence than mere awareness of risks and crises. For that reason, a rational choice framework with an emphasis on a mission may not be the best approach to understanding this data. This realization is discussed more in the next section.
What the Findings Mean
      The findings indicate that there are no significant correlations between geopolitical awareness and bank employees' confidence or between debt levels and bank employees' confidence. Geopolitics, monetary policy, debt, and economic crisis awareness do not appear to be universal factors that decrease bank employees' confidence levels about their banks being able to sustain a global economic crisis or their own ability to do their jobs. However, certain associations were made that could help to explain some patterns perceived in the survey and post-survey follow-ups via member checking. What the associations suggested was that confidence existed in the employees prior to any awareness and that awareness fueled whichever way confidence levels were trending among workers. If workers were losing confidence, awareness of these factors increased the loss. If workers were gaining or were already confident, awareness increased that gain or bolstered that confidence. The awareness in and of itself was not necessarily a significant factor in determining the confidence of employees in the international banking industry. Something else was contributing to their confidence formation and development.
One possible explanation from the rational choice and mission command framework suggests that bank employees do not question policy or mission in the light of developing geopolitical situations or increasing debt levels around the world. Rather, they question their own futures in the industry if they perceive a potential threat to their job security. It does appear that bank employees have different views and opinions on the state of markets, the role of central banks, and the impact of geopolitics depending on what bank employs them. Employees of Deutsche Bank showed far less confidence in the system's sustainability overall as compared to JP Morgan. This may indicate that another factor is influencing the results, such as the perceived internal stability of the bank employing the worker, for there is no uniformity or consensus among the bank employees overall. Overall, the findings are consistent with existing literature that a sense of moral hazard or a sense of a lack of confidence has not grown among bank employees. It appears as Pikulina et al. (2017) point out that lessons from 2008 have not been learned and that history could be on the verge of repeating itself. On the other hand, Pikulina et al. (2017) could be interpreted as having a negative opinion of the utility of the facts and of having a lack of trust or confidence in the industry that influences their outlook and interpretation of their own findings. If one is already confident, it may not be a matter of ignorance of risks or events. It may simply be a matter of understanding the utility of this information and whether one has reached a level of self-actualization in one's own life.  
To pursue that line of thought, however, would require applying another theoretical approach, such as Maslow's (1943).In the light of the theoretical framework of the study, rational choice theory, which posits that individuals or organizations make decisions based on the weighing of costs and benefits, the results suggest that one need not know costs or benefits as they appear in reality or one's mind because one accepts that the international banking sector is too big to fail. According to the theoretical framework, if one is not confident about the costs and benefits, one cannot proceed effectively in the decision-making process. However, the bank employees of the majority of banks did not bear this sentiment out in their responses. This suggests that the approach is inadequate in making sense of the responses.
Reasons for confidence included the belief that banking models were capable of withstanding stress in the system; the central banks would provide sufficient liquidity; regulations had been put in place that would prevent a similar crisis from occurring again, and that geopolitical risk was not a factor in today's market, which was supported by the now conventional monetary policy of central banks around the world intervening in markets to support them. The bankers overall held the view that the markets were necessary for developed worlds to maintain social order, as pension funds, insurance funds, sovereign wealth funds, and mutual funds all depend upon the marketplace offering a stabled ROI. The majority ofMost of them were satisfied that governments would not let markets fail.