Published on March 10, 2014
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME IN MANAGEMENT (IJARM) ISSN 0976 - 6324 (Print) ISSN 0976 - 6332 (Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, March-April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijarm.asp Journal Impact Factor (2014): 1.6232 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com IJARM ©IAEME A THEORETICAL STUDY ON THE BASIC CONCEPTS AND DEVELOPMENTS IN ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT S. Subhashini1, C.S. RamaniGopal2 Research Scholar1, Prof and Head2 Faculty of Management Studies, Vinayaka Missions University, Salem. ABSTRACT In organizational behavior and industrial and organizational psychology, Organizational commitment is the individual's psychological attachment to the organization. Organizational commitment predicts work variables such as turnover, organizational citizenship behavior, and job performance. Some of the factors such as role stress, empowerment, job insecurity and employability, and distribution of leadership have been shown to be connected to a worker's sense of organizational commitment. Organizational commitment can be contrasted with other work-related attitudes, such as job satisfaction, defined as an employee's feelings about their job, and organizational identification, defined as the degree to which an employee experiences a sense of oneness' with their organization. I. INTRODUCTION Organizational commitment may be defined as the psychological attachment of an individual to his/her organization and he/she wishes to continue to work with the organization. Mowday, Steers, and Porter (1979) defined organizational commitment as, “the relative strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular organization. That can be characterized by three factors: (i) a strong belief in and acceptance of the organization’s goals and values, (ii) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the organization, and (iii) a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization. Organizational commitment has significant implications for organizations. A high level of commitment among employees toward their organization enhances organizational effectiveness and helps the organization to achieve its objectives (Meyer & Allen, 1997). 1
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME Moreover, commitment to the organization has been found related to a variety of organizational outcomes, such as increased employee performance and job satisfaction, reduced turnover and withdrawal cognition, lower absenteeism rate, and increased organizational citizenship behavior (Fornes, Rocco, & Wollard, 2008; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer et al., 2002). II. CONSTRUCTS OF COMMITMENT: Researchers considered commitment as unidimensional construct (e.g., Becker, 1960; Mowday et al., 1979; Wiener, 1982), while others viewed commitment as multidimensional construct (e.g., Meyer & Allen, 1991; O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986; Penley & Gould, 1988). According to the unidimensional perspective, commitment is defined as a consistent line of activity that a person engages because of the recognition of costs associated with leaving (Becker, 1960) or more popularly, it is called an emotional attachment of employee to the organization (Mowday et al., 1979). On the other hand, the multidimensional approach to organizational commitment contends that commitment can occur in different forms, such as compliance, identification, and internalization (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986) or affective, continuance, and normative commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). III. DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT Two major theoretical approaches emerge from previous research on commitment: Firstly, commitment is viewed as an attitude of attachment to the organization, which leads to particular job–related behaviors. The committed employee, for example, is less often absent, and is less likely to leave the organization voluntarily, than are less committed employees. Secondly, one line of research in organizations focuses on the implications of certain types of behaviors on subsequent attitudes. A typical finding is that employees who freely choose to behave in a certain way, and who find their decision difficult to change, become committed to the chosen behavior and develop attitudes consistent with their choice. One approach emphasizes the influence of commitment attitudes on behaviors, whereas the other emphasizes. Although the ‘commitment attitude behavior’ and ‘committing behavior attitude’ approaches emerge from different theoretical orientations, and have generated separate research traditions, understanding the commitment process is facilitated by viewing these two approaches as, inherently, inter–related. Rather than viewing the causal arrow, between attitudinal and behavioral commitment, as pointing in one direction or the other, it is more useful to consider the two as reciprocally–related over time. It is equally reasonable to assume that (a) commitment attitudes lead to committing behaviors that subsequently reinforce and strengthen attitudes; and (b) committing behaviors lead to commitment attitudes and subsequent committing behaviors. The important issue is not whether the commitment process begins with either attitude or behavior. Rather, it is important to recognize the development of commitment may involve the subtle interplay of attitudes and behaviors over a period of time. The process through with commitment is developed may involve self–reinforcing cycles of attitudes and behaviors that evolve on the job, and over time, strengthen employee commitment to the organization. 2
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME IV. MODELS OF COMMITMENT Organizational scientists have also developed many nuanced definitions of organizational commitment, and numerous scales to measure them. Exemplary of this work is Meyer and Allen's model of commitment, which was developed to integrate numerous definitions of commitment that had been proliferated in the literature. Meyer and Allen's model has also been critiqued because the model is not consistent with empirical findings. Meyer and Allen's (2007) three-component model of commitment was created to argue that commitment has three different components that correspond with different psychological states. Meyer and Allen created the model for two reasons: first "aid in the interpretation of existing research" and second "to serve as a framework for future research. Meyer and Allen’s research indicated that there are three "mind sets" which can characterize an employee's commitment to the organization: Affective Commitment AC is defined as the employee's positive emotional attachment to the organization. Meyer and Allen pegged AC as the “desire” component of organizational commitment. An employee who is affectively committed strongly identifies with the goals of the organization and desires to remain a part of the organization. This employee commits to the organization because he/she "wants to". This commitment can be influenced by many different demographic characteristics: age, tenure, sex, and education but these influences are neither strong nor consistent. The problem with these characteristics is that while they can be seen, they cannot be clearly defined. Meyer and Allen gave the example that “positive relationships between tenure and commitment maybe due to tenure-related differences in job status and quality” .In developing this concept, Meyer and Allen drew largely on Mowday, Porter, and Steers's (2006) concept of commitment, which in turn drew on earlier work by Kanter (1968). Continuance Commitment Continuance Commitment is the “need” component or the gains verses losses of working in an organization. “Side bets,” or investments, are the gains and losses that may occur should an individual stay or leave an organization. An individual may commit to the organization because he/she perceives a high cost of losing organizational membership (cf. Becker's 1960 "side bet theory". Things like economic costs (such as pension accruals) and social costs (friendship ties with co-workers) would be costs of losing organizational membership. But an individual doesn’t see the positive costs as enough to stay with an organization they must also take into account the availability of alternatives (such as another organization), disrupt personal relationships, and other “side bets” that would be incurred from leaving their organization. The problem with this is that these “side bets” don’t occur at once but that they “accumulate with age and tenure”. Normative Commitment The individual commits to and remains with an organization because of feelings of obligation, the last component of organizational commitment. These feelings may derive from a strain on an individual before and after joining an organization. For example, the organization may have invested resources in training an employee who then feels a 'moral' obligation to put forth effort on the job and stay with the organization to 'repay the debt.' It may also reflect an internalized norm, developed before the person joins the organization through family or other socialization processes, that one should be loyal to one's organization. 3
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME The employee stays with the organization because he/she "ought to". But generally if an individual invest a great deal they will receive “advanced rewards.” V. CRITIQUE TO THE THREE-COMPONENT MODEL Since the model was made, there has been conceptual critique to what the model is trying to achieve. Specifically from three psychologists, Omar Solinger, Woody Olffen, and Robert Roe. To date, the three-component conceptual model has been regarded as the leading model for organizational commitment because it ties together three aspects of earlier commitment research (Becker, 2005; Buchanan, 2005; Kanter, 1968; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Salancik, 2004; Weiner, 2004; Weiner & Vardi, 2005). However, a collection of studies have shown that the model is not consistent with empirical findings. Solinger, Olffen, and Roe use a later model by Alice Eagly and Shelly Chaiken, Attitude-behavior Model (2004), to present that TCM combines different attitude phenomena. They have come to the conclusion that TCM is a model is for predicting turnover. In a sense the model describes why people should stay with the organization whether it is because they want to, need to, or ought to. The model appears to mix together an attitude toward a target, that being the organization, with an attitude toward a behavior, which is leaving or staying. They believe the studies should return to the original understanding of organizational commitment as an attitude toward the organization and measure it accordingly. Although the TCM (Three-Component Model) is a good way to predict turnover, the psychologists do not believe it should be the general model. Because Eagly and Chaiken's model is so general, it seems that the TCM can be described as a specific subdivision of their model when looking at a general sense of organizational commitment. It becomes clear that affective commitment equals an attitude toward a target, while continuance and normative commitment are representing different concepts referring to anticipated behavioral outcomes, specifically staying or leaving. This observation backs up the conclusion that organizational commitment is perceived by TCM as combining different target attitudes and behavioral attitudes, which they believe to be both confusing and logically incorrect. The attitude-behavioral model can demonstrate explanations for something that would seem contradictory in the TCM. That is that affective commitment has stronger associations with relevant behavior and a wider range of behaviors, compared to normative and continuance commitment. Attitude toward a target (the organization) is obviously applicable to a wider range of behaviors than an attitude toward a specific behavior (staying). After their research, Sollinger, Olffen, and Roe believe Eagly and Chaiken's attitude-behavior model from 1993 would be a good alternative model to look at as a general organizational commitment predictor because of its approach at organizational commitment as a singular construct, which in turn would help predicting various behaviors beyond turnover. VI. FACTORS THAT IMPACT JOB COMMITMENT Role Stress Dysfunctions in role performance have been associated with a large number of consequences, almost always negative, which affect the well being of workers and functioning of organizations. An individual's experience of receiving incompatible or conflicting requests (role conflict) and/or the lack of enough information to carry out his/her job (role ambiguity) are causes of role stress. Role ambiguity and conflict decrease worker's performance and are positively related to the probability of the workers leaving the 4
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME organization. Role conflict and ambiguity have been proposed as determining factors of workers' job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Empowerment Empowerment in the workplace has had several different definitions over the years. It has been considered 'energizing followers through leadership, enhancing self efficacy by reducing powerlessness and increasing intrinsic task motivation.' A psychological view of empowerment describes it as 'a process of intrinsic motivation, perceived control, competence, and energizing towards achieving goals.' There are two prominent concepts of empowerment. The first is Structural Empowerment which comes from the Organizational/Management Theory and is described as the ability to get things done and to mobilize resources. The second is Psychological Empowerment which comes from Social Psychological models and is described as psychological perceptions/attitudes of employees about their work and their organizational roles. Job Insecurity and Employability In a study conducted by De Cuyper research found that workers who were on fixedterm contracts or considered "temporary workers" reported higher levels of job insecurity than permanent workers. Job insecurity was found to negatively correlate with job satisfaction and affective organizational commitment in permanent workers. The study also found that job satisfaction and organizational commitment were highly correlated with being a permanent worker. Distribution of Leadership A study conducted by Hulpia et al. focused on the impact of the distribution of leadership and leadership support among teachers and how that affected job satisfaction and commitment. The study found that there was a strong relationship between organizational commitment and the cohesion of the leadership team and the amount of leadership support. VII. FORCES FOR COMMITMENT An alternative explanation of behavioral stability lies in the concept of commitment. As a force directing behavior, it must be conceptually differentiated from current motivation models - specifically, expectancy and equity. For this reason, commitment will be defined here as a stabilizing force that acts to maintain behavioral direction when expectancy/equity conditions are not met and do not function. Scholl (1981) posits there are at least four possible commitment mechanisms that force an individual to be committed: (1) investments, (2) reciprocity, (3) lack of alternatives, and (4) identification. Investments Based on Becker's (1960) early arguments, a number of empirical investigations have attempted to verify the proposition that individual investments into a particular organization act as a stabilizing or maintenance mechanism. Specifically, investments (termed "side bets" by Becker) are posited to decrease an individual's propensity to leave the organization. Investments can be thought of as contributions whereby a future gain from present participation is tied to continuance of membership (Kantor, 1968). In terms of inducements/contributions, there is a time lag in the exchange: the individual makes a contribution today in expectation of future inducements. This is posited to tie the individual 5
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME to the organization, even when the individual becomes dissatisfied with aspects of the exchange. The concept of "paying dues" nicely captures this idea. Investments can also be viewed in terms of alternative opportunities forgone (Blau, 1967). Reciprocity Although the literature does not deal specifically with reciprocity as a mechanism of organizational commitment, one can clearly see how the norm of reciprocity would act to hold individuals into a system when either exchange relationships were dissatisfying or more attractive opportunities existed. The most specific theoretical formulation of the norm of reciprocity has been presented by Gouldner (1960), who holds that reciprocity is a generalized and probably universal norm. Specifically, the norm is that (1) people should help those who have helped them, and (2) people should not harm those who have helped them. Whereas investments accrue as individuals make contributions that will be rewarded at a future time, reciprocity would work in the opposite fashion: an individual would receive a benefit, such as training or an opportunity beyond his or her current ability, and would expect to repay it through future performance. If the norm of reciprocity holds, we would expect that the debt incurred through advance rewards would act to hold the individual into a particular system until the debt was repaid. Additionally, we would not expect individuals to leave if doing so would cause any harm to an employer who has helped them. Social Identity As Friedman and Havighurst (1954]) discovered, work is a major source of status and identification for a large number of individuals. It seems likely that, as an individual becomes more embedded in a social identity, change would become more difficult. This notion has been difficult to test empirically because a number of conceptualizations of commitment include identification as a component of commitment (Buchanan, 1974; Porter et al., 1974; Sheldon, 1971). If we stick to the concept of commitment as a force leading to consistency of action, it seems reasonable to view identification as a process that increases commitment. Specifically, identification can be defined as the linking of one's social identity to a specific social role. In operationalizing this definition, Stevens, Beyer, and Trice (1978 ) found that identification was one of a number of factors leading to a decreased propensity to leave the organization among federal service managers. Thus, we can posit that if an alternative opportunity does not allow for maintenance of a particular social identity, we would expect that an individual's commitment to that opportunity would be increased. Lack of Alternatives In the course of careers, individuals develop job related skills and abilities. Some of these skills sets are based what Becker (1993) termed general training; training for skills applicable to many organizations and even many career paths. Pursuing an MBA degree is an example of general training. Becker also identified a type of training he called specific training; training for skills that are use explicitly while employed by one's current organization. These skills are general non-portable and non-transferable to other organizations. 6
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME VIII. GUIDELINES TO ENHANCE ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT Five rules that help to enhance organizational commitment are: 1. Commit to people-first values The values of the organization have to be put in to writing. The organization should also hire the right-kind managers, and walk the talk. 2. Clarify and communicate your mission Commitment can be enhances by Clarifying the mission and ideology of the organization and also making it charismatic; The organization should also use value-based hiring practices and stress on value-based orientation and training and should also put effort in building tradition. 3. Guarantee organizational justice The organization should have a comprehensive grievance procedure and can also provide for extensive two-way communications. 4. Community of practice Organizational commitment can also be enhanced by building value-based homogeneity and also by sharing it alike. The organization must emphasize on barn raising, cross-utilization, and teamwork. It should also strive in getting people to work together. 5. Support employee development The organization should commit to actualizing and provide first-year job challenge. It should enrich, empower and promote the employee from within and also provide developmental activities and provide employee security without guarantees. IX. HIGH COMMITMENT WORK PRACTICES Commitment according to Jaw and Liu (2004) is not only a human relation concept but also involves generating human energy and activating human mind. Without commitment, the implementation of new ideas and initiatives will be compromised. Human resource system can facilitate the development or organizational competencies through eliciting employees’ commitment to the firm (Arthur, 1994; Boxall & Macky, 2009). Hence organizations with a fit business strategy, structure and practices and policy might perform better, Walton (1995) prescribed “commitment” as a distinctive strategy for HRM whose positive effect will be felt. High commitment work practice according to Guest (2003) is an approach to managing employees, which emphasizes is on the need to develop organizational commitment amongst employees based on the assumption that it will lead to positive outcomes such as low labor turn over, absenteeism, better motivation and improved 7
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME performance. Several academic researches on human resource management practices suggested that high commitment human resource practices will increase organizational effectiveness by creating a condition whereby employees become highly motivated and involved in the organizational activities aimed at achieving organizational goals (Arthur, 1994; Abu-Baker, 2010; Boxall & Macky, 2009). Superior performance has been linked with organizations that implement this practices based on the fact that ‘commitment approach’ as classified by (Walton, 1995) is used, which aims at increasing effectiveness, productivity and rely on conditions that encourages employees to identify with the goals of the organization and also work in order to achieve common goals (Sweetman, 2001). Moreover, recent studies have shown that high commitment practices can work well synergistically and a reflective of a general commitment strategy (Sweetman, 2001). Evidences derived from social science researches have shown that there is now a broad agreement amongst commentators that high commitment work practices do improve performance, labour productivity and the quality of service (Boxall & Macky, 2009; Marchington 1994; Pfeffer 1994). Although researchers such as Boxall and Macky (2009) and Purcell, Kinnie, Hutchinson, Rayton and Swart (2003) have argued that the majority of previous studies have looked at high commitment work practices from the employers’ perspective, and the over dependence on such perspectives can sometimes be mis-leading and will not present the real impact on organizational performance. Nevertheless, when employees positively interpret high commitment work practices, it will sequentially increase their commitment to the organization, thereby increasing their individual performances and hence organizational performance will also increase (Purcell et al.,2003; Peccei, 2004). Although a commitment strategy can be tied to all company human resource practices; recruitment, selection, performance evaluation, according to Scholl (2003), it can also be used to develop psychological connections between the company and employee as a means of achieving goals (Arthur, 1994; Scholl, 2003). X. CONCLUSION From the above study, there is progress in our understanding of commitment and organizational commitment, both conceptually, and, more practically, in terms of the positive consequences for organizations of having committed employees. Evidence clarifies that investment in employees can have positive financial consequences for firms and their shareholders, and may help broaden their narrow view of the world. Its identified that employee perception is the foundation of employee motivation, leading to higher organization commitment, and that employee perception forms the antecedent of organizational commitment. Positive employee perception leads to improved employee motivation, which in turn, leads to higher organizational commitment. As upbringing, race and religion are key factors influencing employee perception, a clear understanding of the meaning of organizational commitment among all persons concerned, such as researchers, respondents, practitioners and academicians is vital. REFERENCE 1. 2. Ahmad, Nora et al. "Empowerment, job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A comparative analysis of nurses working in Malaysia and England", Journal of Nursing Management, United Kingdom, July 2010. Becker, G. 1993 “Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education”-(3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 8
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Becker HS (1960)-“Notes on the concept of commitment”- Am. J. Sociol. 66: 32−40. Concha, Anton. "The impact of role stress on workers' behaviour through job satisfaction and organizational commitment"-International Journal of Psychology, Spain, June 2009. De Cuyper, Nele. "Job insecurity and employability in fixed-term contractors, agency workers, and permanent workers: Associations with job satisfaction and affective organizational commitment"-Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, US, April 2009. Hulpia, Hester et al. "The relationship between the perception of distributed leadership in secondary schools and teachers’ and teacher leaders’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment" School Effectiveness and School Improvement, United Kingdom, September 2009. Kanter, R. (1968)-“Commitment and social organization: A study of commitment mechanisms in utopian communities”- American Sociological Review, 33, 499-517. Meyer, J P and Allen,NJ (1991).-“A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations”-Human Resource Management Review, 1, pp. 61-98. Meyer, JP and Allen, NJ (2007)-“A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations”-Human Resource Management Review, 1, pp. 61-98. Mowday, R., Porter, L., and Steers, R. (2006)-“Employee Organization Linkages’New York: Academic Press. Neerpal Rathi “Psychological Well-Being and Organizational Commitment: Exploration of the Relationship” Working Paper No.106/2011-August 2011 Owoyemi Oluwakemi Ayodeji, Oyelere, Michael, Elegbede, Tunde ,Gbajumo-Sheriff, Mariam - “Enhancing Employees’ Commitment to Organization through Training”International Journal of Business and Management Vol. 6, No. 7; July 2011 Solinger, O. N., van Olffen, W., & Roe, R. A. (2008)-“Beyond the three-component model of organizational commitment”- Journal Of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 70-83 Wiener, Y. 1982-“Commitment in organizations. A normative view”-Academy of Management Review. 7(3). Pp:418-428 http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/-Ms.AnvitiGupta/Organizational Commitment: Basic Concepts & Recent Developments.html http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/scholl/webnotes/Commitment.htm C.Ramanigopal, “Knowledge Management Strategies in Higher Education”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), Volume 3, Issue 1, 2012, pp. 20 - 29. ISSN Print: 0976 – 6324, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6332. C.Murali Kumaran and Dr.M.Sivasubramanian, “A Study on Organisational Citizenship Behaviour and Organisational Commitment Among Employees”, International Journal of Management (IJM), Volume 4, Issue 4, 2013, pp. 103 - 110, ISSN Print: 0976-6502, ISSN Online: 0976-6510. C. S. Ramanigopal, G. Palaniappan and A. Mani, “Mind Mapping and Knowledge Management: Coding and Implementation of KM System”, International Journal of Management (IJM), Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 250 - 259, ISSN Print: 0976-6502, ISSN Online: 0976-6510. 9
In organizational behavior and industrial and organizational psychology, Organizational commitment is the individual's psychological attachment to the ...
A THEORETICAL STUDY ON THE BASIC CONCEPTS AND DEVELOPMENTS IN ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT S. Subhashini 1, C.S. RamaniGopal 2 Research Scholar1, Prof and Head 2
Situational Factors - Download as Powerpoint Presentation (.ppt), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or view presentation slides online.