The two 'faces' of continuance commitment

Issue 3(Oct-Dec 2012)

International journal of the academy of Organizational behavior management (IJAOBM)

IAOBM

Editor in Chief

Dr. Mohammad Ali Sarlak

Associate Editors

Alan Smith, Robert Morris University, United StatesAndrew Creed, Deakin University, Australia Anna Maria Gil Lafuente, University of Barcelona, Spain Anthony Libertella, Adelphi University, United States Chunhui Liu, University of Winnipeg, Canada Constantin Bratianu, Academy of Economic Studies of Bucharest, Romania Eric Otenyo, Northern Arizona University, United States Farley Nobre, Federal University of Parana, Brazil Flora Bernardel, University of Padova, Italy Irina Purcarea, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania Jaime Rivera-Camino, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid , Spain Jan Kratzer, Technical University Berlin ,Germany João Ferreira, University of Beira Interior, Portugal Jonathan Matusitz ,University of Central Florida, United States Jose M. Merigo ,University of Barcelona, Spain LILIANA FARIA ,ISLA CAMPUS LISBOA - LAUREATE INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITIES, Portugal Luiz Sakuda , Centro Universitário da FEI, Brazil Mahmud Akhter Shareef, McMaster University, Canada Maria Rosita Cagnina, University of Udine, Italy Matthew Irvin, Eastern Kentucky University, United States Patrizia Garengo, University of Padua, Italy Ruppa Thulasiram, University of Manitoba, Canada Simon Samwel Msanjila , Mzumbe University, Tanzania Susan Kruml, Millikin University, United States Theodor Valentin Purcarea, Romanian-American University, Romania Thierry Rakotobe-Joel , Ramapo College of New Jersey , United States Tomislav Hernaus, University of Zagreb, Croatia Tsan-Ming Choi , The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong VÍCTOR JESÚS GARCÍA MORALES, UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA, Spain Vitor Braga, Porto Polytechnic - School of Technology and Management of Felgueiras, Portugal Xi Zhang, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China YANNIS MARKOVITS, National Centre of Public Administration and Local Government, Greece

Editorial Review Board

Adebimpe Lincoln, Cardiff Metropolitan University, USA Aminu Mamman, University of Manchester, USA Ana Aleksic, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Economics and Business Zagreb, Croatia Angilberto Freitas, Unigranrio University, Brazil Antonia Mercedes García-Cabrera , Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain Arto Ojala, University of Jyväskylä, Finland Carla Marques, University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Portugal CRISTINA ESTEVÃO, School of Management of Idanha-a-Nova, Portugal Daniel Pittino, Italy CRISTINA Raluca POPESCU,University of Bucharest, Romania Dario Miocevic, University of Split/Faculty of Economics, Croatia David Rooney, The University of Queensland, Australia Davood Askarany, University of Auckland, Bahrain Fernanda Nogueira, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal Helga Rippen, Westat ,USA Irena Jindrichovska, Prague University of Economics and Management, Czech Republic Jen-te YANG ,National Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and Tourism ,Taiwan Joseph Sungau, Mzumbe University, Tanzania Júlio Abrantes, Polytechnic Institute of Castelo Branco, Portugal Jürgen Donhauser, Comenius University Bratislava ,Germany Justine Mbukwa, Mzumbe University, Tanzania K. Övgü Çakmak-OtluoÄŸlu, Istanbul University, Turkey Maria Nieves Perez Arostegui, University of Granada, Spain María Teresa Bolívar-Ramos, University of Granada, Spain Mayumi tabat, National Dong Hwa University, Japan Olli-Pekka Viinamäki , University of Vaasa, Finland Pilar Piñeiro García, University of Vigo, Spain Prasenjit Chatterjee, MCKV Institute of Engineering, India Priscila Alfaro-Barrantes, Florida State University, United States RAMANJEET SINGH, India Roberta Cuel, University of Trento, Italy Rodrigo Martin-Rojas, Leon University, Spain Rupsa Chatterjee, calcutta University, India Ryh-song Yeh , Yuan Ze University, Taiwan Sara Nunes, Polytechnic Institute of Castelo Branco, Portugal Shrimatee Dowd-Koniecki, USA Sonia M. Suárez-Ortega, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain Timothy Kellison, The Florida State University, USA Tracy Cooper, University of South Florida, USA Viktoriia Potishuk, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany Wen-Chung Shih ,Asia University, Taiwan Yong Liu , Tianjin University, China

International journal of the academy of Organizational behavior management (IJAOBM)

IAOBM

Issue 3(Oct-Dec 2012)

Table of Contents

1 THE IMPACT OF TEAM AUTONOMY ON ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT OF JAPANESE CARE WORKERS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED PROCEDURAL JUSTICEIKUSHI YAMAGUCHI, Meiji University, JapanMAI YAMAGUCHI, Japan Lutheran College and Graduate school, japan

33 EXPLORING THE BEHAVIORAL NATURE OF CSR IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: THE CASE OF COMPANY RESPONSES TO HIV AND AIDS IN MALAWIRHODA BAKUWA , University of Malawi, MalawiERIC SANKHULANI, University of Malawi, Malawi

62 THE TWO ‘FACES’ OF CONTINUANCE COMMITMENT: THE MODERATING ROLE OF JOB SATISFACTION ON THE CONTINUANCE COMMITMENT – ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR RELATIONSHIPYANNIS MARKOVITS , 1 Regional Institute of Education of Thessaloniki , Greece

83 GAINING BEHAVIOR KNOWLEDGE IN THE ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT: AN EXPLORATORY CASE STUDYMICHELLE L. ROSSER, University of Oklahoma, USAROBERT M. NELSON , University of Central Oklahoma, USA

123 INFLUENCE OF SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND PERSONALITY ON CAREER EXPLORATION: STUDY WITH PORTUGUESE STUDENTSLILIANA FARIA, Laureate International Universities , PortugalMARIA DO CéU TAVEIRA, University of Minho, Portugal

150 THE EFFECTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE ON POLITICAL BEHAVIORSMOHAMMAD ALI SARLAK, PNU, IRANHOSEIN SAFARZADEH, Islamic Azad University, IRANMAHDI SAADAT FARD, Islamic Azad University, IRAN

This is one paper ofInternational journal of the academy of Organizational behavior management

(IJAOBM)Issue 3(Oct-Dec 2012)

International journal of the academy of Organizational behavior management (IJAOBM), 3(2012) 62-82

621927-565X (Print) - ISSN 1927-5668 (Online) -, Copyright IAOBM 2013

The two ‘faces’ of continuance commitment:

The moderating role of job satisfaction on the continuance commitment – organizational citizenship behavior relationship

Yannis Markovits 1, 2

1 Regional Institute of Education of Thessaloniki, National Centre of Public Administration and Local Government, Greece

2 Department of Accounting, School of Business and Economics, Alexander’s Technological Educational Institute of Thessaloniki, Greece,

Nik. PLastira 66B, Thessaloniki, GR-542 50

[email protected]

Abstract

Problem statement: The purpose of this study is to explore the role of job satisfaction to the continuance commitment – organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) relationship. In particular to examine satisfaction’s mediating role by pointing out that the two ‘faces’ of continuance commitment make very specific predictions: those with the ‘happy face’ (the highly satisfied) will show more OCBs the more they realize that they have a lot to lose if the leave the organization; and those with the ‘unhappy face’ (the less satisfied) will show less OCB the more they realize how ‘stuck’ to the organization they are. Methodology: A structured questionnaire was delivered to employees measuring continuance commitment, job satisfaction, OCB, positive/negative affectivity and demographics to 392 public sector and 323 private sector employees in Greece. Results: The hierarchical regression analyses show that there is a significant interactive effect among continuance commitment – job satisfaction – OCB for both sectors (private and public). Also, employees with low job satisfaction the regression of OCB frequency on continuance commitment are significantly different from zero, and for employees with high job satisfaction the regression slopes indicate significant differences from zero both for continuance commitment. Conclusions: These results explain the effect of a satisfied or dissatisfied worker on the relationship between the more calculative forms of commitment on the intended behavior at work, especially the extra-role behavior. The “Good Soldier” syndrome seems to be evident when a worker is happy with the job, even if the decision to stay with the organization is due to the need for the particular job (either due to lack of alternatives or due to high sacrifices). If management wants employees with OCBs, then job satisfaction is essential for this occurrence.

Keywords:

Continuance commitment, Job satisfaction, Organizational citizenship behaviors, Moderating effect

mailto:[email protected]



Introduction

Job satisfaction “is an attitudinal variable … [and] can be considered as a global feeling

about the job or as a related constellation of attitudes about various aspects or facets of the job”

[Spector, 1997, p. 2]. It could be considered as “an affective … reaction to a job that results from

the incumbent’s comparison of actual outcomes with those that are desired … [Cranny et al.,

1992, p. 1], or as an “affective response by individuals resulting from an appraisal of their work

roles in the job that they presently hold” [Graham & Messner, 1998]. In general, job satisfaction

has been seen in the relevant literature, as an affective or emotional attitude of an individual

towards his or her job [James & Jones, 1980] or as a general attitude towards a job and some

particular aspects of it, e.g., nature of work, relations with co-workers, etc [Knoop, 1995]. The

position taken in the present paper is that job satisfaction is composed of two facets relating to

the extrinsic and intrinsic features of a job [Cooper-Hakim & Viswesvaran, 2005]. Extrinsic

satisfaction is the satisfaction derived from extrinsic circumstances, for example, remuneration,

management policies, physical conditions, or job security. Intrinsic satisfaction is the

individually felt satisfaction arising out of opportunities for achievement, creativity, personal

advancement, etc.

Organizational commitment is a multi-component construct which describes individuals’

feelings of attachment to their organization. For the needs of this research we have used one of

the components conceptualized by Allen and Meyer’s [1990]: continuance commitment.

Continuance commitment is more of a calculative form derived from the individual’s ongoing

investment in the organization and the availability of alternative employment of similar value

[Dunham et al., 1994]; the employee ‘needs to be’ to the organization. Recently, continuance

commitment has been further divided into two distinguishable categories: one is called high

sacrifices – (i.e., the perceived sacrifices associated with leaving from an organization) and the

other low alternatives – (i.e., the lack of alternative employment opportunities) [McGee & Ford,

1987; Meyer et al., 1990; Dunham et al., 1994; Meyer et al., 2002; Powell & Meyer, 2004;

Bentein et al., 2005].

The concept of Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is firstly introduced in the mid

1980s by Organ [1988] and is the “individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or

explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the



effective functioning of the organization”. Later, Van Dyne et al. [1994] proposed the “extra-role

behavior” as the behavior which benefits the organization and is intended to benefit the

organization; a behavior which is discretionary and which goes beyond existing role

expectations. Also, OCB defined as behavior that goes beyond the basic requirements of the job;

is to a large extent discretionary; and is of benefit to the organization [Lambert, 2006]. Thus,

organizational citizenship is the functional, extra-role, pro-social organizational behavior

directed at individual, groups and/or an organization. These are helping behaviors not formally

prescribed by the organization and for which there are no direct rewards or punishments. From

the above argument, there should be excluded those pro-social behaviors that are prescribed by

the organization as performance requirements, and dysfunctional or non-compliant behaviors

[Chien, 2004].

1. Review of literature and hypothesis

1.1 Antecedents and correlates of organizational citizenship behaviors

Bolon [1997] conducted a field study in a large tertiary hospital in the US and 202 mainly

nursing personnel participated in the study. He found that job satisfaction and organizational

commitment were significantly correlated to the OCBI construct - these behaviors are directed

toward individuals and comprising of altruism and courtesy as suggested by Williams and

Anderson [1991]. As far as the forms of commitment are concerned, continuance commitment

was unrelated to this part of the construct that the citizenship behavior is aimed towards co-

worker. Another study conducted on government employees in Kuwait [Alotaibi, 2001] found

that neither job satisfaction nor organizational commitment could be considered as antecedents

or as predictors of OCBs. The researcher explained this finding on cultural specificity, since

almost all previous studies were conducted in a Western or American cultural context, whereas,

this study was in a Near Eastern, Arabic cultural environment. However, another non-Western

study, this time conducted in the Sultanate of Oman [Kuehn & Al-Busaidi, 2002] on data

collected from 153 employees working in the private and public sector, reached the conclusion

that job satisfaction and normative commitment were significant predictors of OCB. It seems,

that even though both previous studies conducted in an Arabic cultural environment, their



contradictory conclusions reached, make them more culturally specific and less generalizable.

Furthermore, LePine et al. [2002] conducted a meta-analysis on OCB literature and research, and

found strong support for the predictor relationship of job satisfaction and organizational

commitment to various OCB measures and constructs. Similar conclusions reached by

Herscovitch and Meyer [2002] found that OCB is a consequence of the existence of

organizational commitment. As it could be seen, results on the relationship between job-related

attitudes and contextual performance are mixed; however, recent meta-analyses have shown that,

by and large, job satisfaction and organizational commitment could be regarded as predictors of

the OCBs, irrespective of the measurement scales adopted. More specifically, although various

different measures and constructs are used for the measurement of OCBs, different studies found

that organizational commitment predicts or correlates with OCBs [cf. Williams & Anderson,

1991; McFarlane Shore & Wayne, 1993; Schappe, 1998]. As far as the predictive relationship of

continuance commitment to OCB, it has been observed that the individual self-concept

moderates the relationship between continuance commitment and individually based OCBs.

According to Johnson and Chang [2006, p. 564] “employees with strong individual self-concepts

pay more attention to person-level information, such as investments and potential economic

losses. These employees would likely cultivate continuance commitment based on compliance,

which involves maintaining membership so long as it prevents the loss of valued investments and

no alternative employment opportunities exist that are more favorable”.

1.2 The moderating relationship

The above argument, leads to a general proposition that there is a moderating relationship between

continuance commitment, job satisfaction, and OCB, i.e., job satisfaction works as moderator of the

predictive relationship between continuance commitment and OCB. Summarizing, the insofar

theorizing, continuance commitment predicts extra-role performance since an individual who feels

committed towards the organization, feels identified with the goals, norms, and values of this

organization, is loyal to management directives and policies pursued and express a tendency to

remain in the organization. By expressing these positive feelings to the organization, the job

performance is not only the expected one, the focal performance, but even more, performance

exceeds what is required by management and is showed through altruism, sportsmanship, courtesy,



boosterism, etc. In other words, OCBs are exposed by the individual. However, continuance

commitment is a driving force that leads to positive feelings towards one’s job, i.e., the expression of

job satisfaction. The individual perceives the job as part of his or her broad organizational

membership and acts accordingly, i.e., performs well at work and even more, behaves as a ‘good

soldier’. The proposition made in this study is that continuance commitment explains OCBs, but this

relationship is moderated by job satisfaction. Following, the above argument, the major question is:

which forms of continuance commitment manage to predict extra-role behaviors? Continuance

commitment is the calculative form derived from the individual’s ongoing investment in the

organization and the availability of alternative employment of similar value. Thus, this form of

commitment implies that the employee makes a rational evaluation or choice of his/her stay in the

organization; the individual measures the side bets of the decision.

Employees, according to the theory of Perceived Organizational Support (POS), tend to

personify the conditions faced during employment and reciprocate this with respect to felt

commitment. In fact, POS would create a felt obligation to care about the organization and

employees will fulfill this type of indebtedness by increasing their commitment and efforts

[Rhoades et al., 2001, p. 825]. This reciprocity norm is also evident on job satisfaction, since

employees by being satisfied with their job, they exhibit positive performance at work [Haar &

Spell, 2004]. Moreover, the Social Exchange Theory (SET) has the ability to predict positive

HRM initiatives, including employee commitment, employee motivation and a desire to remain

with the organization. Gould-Williams and Davies [2005] found in the UK public sector,

specifically in seven local government departments that 58% of the variation in employee

commitment is predicted, 53% variation in motivation and 41% of the variance in the desire to

remain with the organization. In fact, according to the SET, the stronger the relationship of the

individual with the organization, the more the identification, attachment and involvement felt

[Van Knippenberg et al., 2007].

1.3 Hypothesis

As it could be seen from the aforementioned literature review continuance commitment seems to

have weak correlations with positive outcomes such as OCB. However, this finding might



depend on the ‘nature’ of continuance commitment, i.e., whether commitment is due to low

alternatives and or due to high sacrifices. The one ‘face’ of continuance commitment shows that

people are happy where they are, although they have low alternatives and sacrifice many things

if they would leave their organization. These employees are not ‘stuck’ to the organization, but

they are happy workers who also realize that their organization provides benefits to them - those

ones that they would sacrifice if they decide to leave the organization. On the other hand, the

other ‘face’ of continuance commitment would be that people are unhappy but they have no

alternatives and would sacrifice a lot. Those are the ones that are really ‘stuck’ with their

organization. These two ‘faces’ of continuance commitment would allow making very specific

predictions about the relationships between continuance commitment and OCB: those with the

‘happy face’, i.e., the highly satisfied would show the more OCB the more they realize that they

have a lot to lose; whereas those with the unhappy face would show even less OCB the more

they realize how ‘stuck’ they are.

The main purpose of our research, therefore, is to collect more empirical evidence for the

importance and nature of interactive attitudinal effects to explain organizational citizenship

behaviors in organizations. More specifically, our research was designed to extend this basic

approach by analyzing a combination of work attitudes that differs from the attitudes prior

research has focused on, namely job satisfaction and continuance commitment. Job satisfaction

represents the ‘situational variable’ and continuance commitment represents ‘personality’ in our

reasoning. Accordingly, it can be expected that both variables interact. If job satisfaction is low

(representing a weak situation), then one’s continuance commitment should have a significant

negative impact on OCB. However, if job satisfaction is high such a strong situation will

overwhelm any continuance commitment impact on OCB. More specifically, continuance

commitment has a strong negative relation to OCB when job satisfaction is low but continuance

commitment will be unrelated to OCB when job satisfaction is high. This leads to the following

hypothesis (Figure 1 presents the heuristic framework of the analysis):

Hypothesis: Job satisfaction moderates the relationship between continuance commitment

and OCB.



CONTINUANCE COMMITMENT

ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIORS

JOB SATISFACTION

Control VariablesPositive/Negative

Affectivity

Figure 1: Heuristic framework for the analysis

3. Methods

3.1 Sampling and subjects

The present field research is a two-study one, and the data collected from two independent

samples drawn from the public and the private sector in Greece. The public sector sample is from ten

regional and local government organizations located in the geographical area of Thessaloniki (overall

six organizations are approached) and in total, 392 employees successfully responded to the research.

The response rate is 61% and the demographic characteristics of the sample are: 42.7% males and

57.3% females; mean age is 35 years; mean organizational tenure is 9 years; 82% of the sample is

non-supervisory employees, and the remaining are heads of departments; educational level is: 20.1%

completed Secondary Education; 18.3% graduated from a Technological Educational Institute;

41.8% are University graduates; 19.8% have a Postgraduate diploma. The respondents answered

anonymously and at their own convenience. As far as the private sector sample is concerned, 323

employees returned to us completed and usable questionnaires from 12 service sector companies. All

companies have premises and operations in the geographical area of Thessaloniki. The overall

response rate is 59%. The demographic characteristics of the sample are: 42.4% males and 57.6%

females; mean age is 32 years; mean organizational tenure is 5 years; 77.4% of the sample is non-

supervisory employees, and the remaining are heads of departments; educational level is: 41.8%

completed Secondary Education; 19.5% graduated from a Technological Educational Institute;



26.3% are University graduates; 12.4% have a Postgraduate diploma. The respondents answered

anonymously and at their own convenience.

3.2 Measures

Job satisfaction is measured through a structured self-report questionnaire based on

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) [Weiss et al., 1967] with twenty three items:

twelve measuring extrinsic satisfaction and eleven measuring intrinsic satisfaction. Continuance

commitment is based on the Continuance Commitment Scale (CCS) [Powell & Meyer, 2004] and

has nine items. For the measurement of OCB, the four dimensional scale of Moorman and

Blakely [1995] is used. This scale has the following dimensions [Fields, 2002, p. 238]:

Interpersonal helping: five items (altruistic behaviors - response to personal needs of co-

workers when they deal with job-related tasks and problems).

Individual initiative: five items (employee efforts to improve individual and group/team

task performance, challenge groupthink, and encourage participation).

Personal industry: four items (adherence to organizational and management rules and instructions,

the unusual attention to quality, and the performance of tasks above and beyond the call of duty).

Loyal boosterism: five items (uncritical faithfulness to the organization, the defense of its

interests, and the contribution to the good reputation of the organization and its general welfare –

the promotion of the organization’s image to outsiders; it includes employees’ actions with

others external to the organization).

As control variable the Positive and Negative Affective Scale (PANAS) is used, [Watson et

al., 1988] comprising of twenty items – ten for positive affectivity and ten for negative

affectivity. This scale measures general positive and negative affect, a personality characteristic

identifying general feelings of positive or negative mood and relating them to the organizational

and job conditions and circumstances. The measurement scale is the 7-point Likert, having as

endpoints 1 = Complete disagreement, and 7 = Complete agreement. All scales employed in this

study are translated into Greek.

4. Results



4.1 Preliminary analyses

Tables 1 and 2 provide descriptive statistics, Cronbach alpha coefficients, and inter-

correlations for the components of job satisfaction, continuance commitment, OCB, and the two

affectivity states for e public sector and private sector samples, respectively.

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4

1. Job satisfaction 4.61 .89 .90

2. Continuance commitment 4.55 1.15 .86 .23**

3. OCB 5.45 .77 .86 .31** .12*

4. Positive affectivity 4.94 .94 .90 .34** .15** .41**

5. Negative affectivity 2.63 .78 .87 -.40** -.14** -.12** -.32**

Note. N = 392, ** p < .01 (two-tailed), * p < .05 (two-tailed)

Table 1: Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients),

Pearson correlations (public sector)

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4

1. Job satisfaction 4.72 1.01 .93

2. Continuance commitment 4.05 1.13 .85 .19**

3. OCB 5.10 .86 .91 .46** .13*

4. Positive affectivity 4.86 .99 .91 .38** -.05 .60**

5. Negative affectivity 2.62 .86 .88 -.03 -.15** -.12** -.23**

Note. N = 323, ** p < .01 (two-tailed), * p < .05 (two-tailed)

Table 2: Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients),

Pearson correlations (private sector)



The variables used for both studies have, by and large, strong inter-correlations and their

internal reliabilities are high, exemplifying significant psychometric properties. As anticipated,

the control variables of positive and negative affect are significantly correlated with all variables

entered into the regression analyses, except in two instances for the private sector sample.

4.2 Public sector sample

The results from the hierarchical regression analysis show that there is a significant

interactive effect among continuance commitment – job satisfaction – OCB: b = 1.10 (p < .01)

and the explained variance of the interaction is 56% (see Table 3). Furthermore, it can be seen

that job satisfaction and continuance commitment exert quite similar interactive influences on

OCB: for employees with low job satisfaction the impact of continuance commitment on OCB is

much more pronounced than for employees with high job satisfaction. Moreover, both

interactions are disordinal in nature as the regression lines of the relationship between

continuance commitment and OCB cross over within the range of satisfaction values [see: Aiken

& West, 1991, p. 22f]. To answer the question of whether the regression of OCB on continuance

commitment are different from zero for high and low values of job satisfaction, in addition,

simple slope analyses are performed. The results of these analyses reveal that for employees with

low job satisfaction the regression of OCB frequency on continuance commitment are

significantly different from zero (b = -1.85, t = 5.43, p < .01). On the other hand, for employees

with high job satisfaction the corresponding regression slopes indicate significant differences

from zero both for continuance commitment (b = 0.23, t = 4.46, p < .01) (see Figure 2).



Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)

Step 1 Step 2

B SE b B SE b

Job satisfaction (JS) .16** .04 -.44** .12

Continuance commitment (CC) .04 .04 -.74** .15

Positive affectivity (PA) .28** .04 .28** .04

Negative affectivity (NA) .11** .04 .10 .04

JS * CC 1.10** .21

R2 .52 .56

Adjusted R2 .27 .32

Note: ** p < .01, * p < .05, N = 392

Table 3: Hierarchical regression analysis for continuance commitment, job satisfaction, and

OCB (public sector)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Low continuance commitment High continuance commitment

CC

OCB

Low job satisfaction High job satisfaction

Figure 2: Regression lines for continuance commitment, job satisfaction, and OCB (public

sector)



4.3 Private sector sample

The results from the hierarchical regression analysis show that there is a significant

interactive effect among continuance commitment – job satisfaction – OCB: b = 1.14 (p < .01)

and the explained variance of the interaction is 48% (Table 4). Furthermore, the results reveal

that for employees with low job satisfaction the regression of OCB frequency on continuance

commitment are significantly different from zero (b = -1.84, t = 4.68, p < .01). On the other

hand, for employees with high job satisfaction the corresponding regression slopes indicate

significant differences for continuance commitment (b = 0.18, t = 3.35, p < .01) (See Figure 3).

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)

Step 1 Step 2

B SE b B SE b

Job satisfaction (JS) .18** .04 .14 .13

Continuance commitment (CC) .09* .04 .05 .18

Positive affectivity (PA) .48** .04 .45** .04

Negative affectivity (NA) -.01 .04 .05 .04

JS * CC 1.14** .24

R2 .42 .48

Adjusted R2 .18 .23

Note: ** p < .01, N = 323

Table 4: Hierarchical regression analysis for continuance commitment, job satisfaction, and

OCB (private sector)



3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Low continuance commitment High continuance commitment

CC

OCB

Low job satisfaction High job satisfaction

Figure 3: Regression lines for continuance commitment, job satisfaction, and OCB (private

sector)

Thus, increasing levels of continuance commitment are, by and large, associated with

decreasing levels of OCB only when job satisfaction is low.

5. Discussion

The present field study explored the moderating role of job satisfaction on the relationship

between continuance commitment and OCB. It has been found that this relationship is evident

and that the role of job satisfaction is to explain “when” this relationship is strong and to what

direction. In other words, when job satisfaction is low, increasing levels of continuance

commitment lead to decreasing levels of OCBs; whereas, when job satisfaction is high,

increasing levels of continuance commitment lead to an increase on OCB. This outcome explains

the effect of a satisfied or dissatisfied worker on the structural relationship between the more

calculative forms of commitment on the intended behavior at work, especially the extra-role

behavior. The “Good Soldier” syndrome seems to be more evident and pronounced when a

worker is happy with his/her job, even if the decision to stay with the organization is not because

he or she wants it, or ought to, but because he or she needs the particular job (either due to lack

of alternatives or due to high sacrifices).



This study provides useful information for managers and HR practitioners, since it stresses the

importance of developing workplace environments and employment relationships that will make

people feel at least happy with their job and the organization they work for. If they expose such

positive feelings, even if they feel that their commitment to the organization is more calculative

than affective, or normative, i.e., the side-bets of their decision to stay are stronger that their

affective feelings or their obligation commitments, then the extra-role and pro-social behaviors

of these workers at work will be exhibited and performed. In other words, if management wants

employees to have OCBs, then job satisfaction is essential for this occurrence.

5.1 Limitations

An important limitation of this study is the problem with the common-variance method that

arises from self-report and mono-source methodological tools adopted. This method biases are

attributable to the measurement method, rather than to the construct of interest [Bagozzi & Yi,

1991]. This might account for some inflation of the relationships between the variables used for the

research, but apparently cannot be responsible for finding links. However, there are relatively few

alternatives to this type of field studies. This deficiency is exhibited in all field studies using self-

reported quantitative-type questionnaires. It is difficult to envisage a way in which individual

attitudes such as job satisfaction can be assessed other than through self report. This is less of a

problem, however, for the hypothesized interaction effects. The problem of common method

variance cannot account for interactions among variables but leads to an underestimation of these

statistical interactions [McClelland & Judd, 1993]. Despite the mono-source design, there should

be confidence in the interactions obtained. Moreover, the instruments developed for this research

have well proven psychometric properties, suggesting that they are likely to be resistant to

common method variance [Spector, 1987]. One alternative to overcome this limitation might be to

focus on a more qualitative approach, although personal interviews with a small number of

respondents would limit generalizability. Longitudinal studies incorporating behavioral data from

third party informants are strongly advocated in the literature. However such an approach was not

possible here and third party informants would be unable to comment on individual attitudes. Third

party reports of satisfaction or behavioral assessment of commitment are clearly avenues to be

pursued in future. However, given that the main contribution of this research was the development



and examination of a conceptual framework incorporating attitudes, self-regulations, and economic

sectors, these further lines of research remain to be developed. Another limitation is the Greek

translation of items, initially constructed in English or of an English-speaking audience. Thus,

interpretation problems could be arise, thus, some statements were further explained when written

in Greek This research decided to direct translate the items assuming to be ‘etic’, instead of

adopting the belief that quantitative researches should use culturally appropriate ‘emic’ measures

[see: Markovits et al., 2010; Vandenberghe, 2003]. Finally, the samples are convenient ones, thus,

this may limit the generalizability of the findings, although the relatively large sample sizes

mediate this shortcoming. The sample sizes are large enough, providing acceptable statistical

power to the results. However, the inclusion of a selection of relevant control variables (e.g.,

positive and negative affectivity), seeks to limit the extent to which individual experience might

confound the outcomes.

6. Recommendations for Future Research

The moderating role of job satisfaction to the continuance commitment - OCB relationship

needs to be further tested on the stability and generalizability of its conceptual framework. In

particular, the present empirical study needs further replication in other cultural contexts, either as

part of a longitudinal study in the same cultural context, or as a cross-cultural and a cross-national

study. Qualitative study of the more personalized and specific areas of OCBs and job attitudes may

also prove illuminating. This can be further connected to qualitative material selected by

managerial assessments of employees’ OCBs and attitudes towards their job and organization.

7. References

Aiken, L.S., & West, S.G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.

New York: Sage.



Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance

and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology,

63(1), 1-18. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x

Alotaibi, A.G. (2001). Antecedents of organizational citizenship behavior: A study of public

personnel in Kuwait. Public Personnel Management, 30(3), 363-377. Retrieved from

http://psycnet.apa.org

Bagozzi, R.P., & Yi, Y.J. (1991). Multitrait–multimethod matrices in consumer research. Journal

of Consumer Research, 17, 426–439. doi: 10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80022-8

Bentein, K., Vandenberghe, C., Vandenberg, R., & Stinglhamber, F. (2005). The role of change

in the relationship between commitment and turnover: A latent growth modeling

approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 468-482. doi: 10.1037/0021-

9010.90.3.468

Bolon, D.S. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior among hospital employees: A

multidimensional analysis involving job satisfaction and organizational commitment.

Hospital and Health Services Administration, 42(2), 221-241. Retrieved from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10167456

Chien, M.H. (2004). An Investigation of the relationship of organizational structure, employee's

personality and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of American Academy of

Business, 5(2), 428-432. Retrieved from http://www.jaabc.com/journal.htm

Cooper-Hakim, A., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). The construct of work commitment: Testing an

integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 131(2), 241-259. doi: 10.1037/0033-

2909.131.2.241

Cranny, C.J., Smith, P.C., & Stone, E.F. (eds.) (1992). Job satisfaction. New York: Lexington.

Dunham, R.B., Grube, J.A., & Castaňeda, M.B. (1994). Organizational commitment: The utility

of an integrative definition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 370-380. doi:

10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.370



Fields, D.L. (2002). Taking the measure of work: A guide to validated scales for organizational

research and diagnosis. Thousand Oaks: Sage

Gould-Williams, J., & Davies, F. (2005). Using Social Exchange Theory to predict the effects of

HRM practice on employee outcomes. Public Management Review, 7(1), 1-24. doi:

10.1080/1471903042000339392

Graham, M.W., & Messner, P.E. (1998). Principals and job satisfaction. The International

Journal of Educational Management, 12(5), 196-202. doi: 10.1108/09513549810225925

Haar, J.M., & Spell, C.S. (2004). Programme knowledge and value of work-family practices and

organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management,

15(6), 1040-1055. doi: 10.1080/09585190410001677304

Herscovitch, L., & Meyer, J.P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: Extension of the

three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 474-487. doi:

10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.474

James, L.R., & Jones, A.P. (1980). Perceived job characteristics and job satisfaction: An

examination of reciprocal causation. Personnel Psychology, 33(1), 97-135. doi:

10.1111/j.1744-6570.1980.tb02167.x

Johnson, R.E., & Chang, C.H. (2006). ‘I’ is to continue and ‘we’ is to affective: The relevance of

the self-concept to organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior,

27(5), 549-570. doi: 10.1002/job.364

Knoop, R. (1995). Influence of participative decision-making on job satisfaction and

organizational commitment of school principles. Psychological Reports, 76(2), 379-382.

doi: 10.2466/pr0.1995.76.2.379

Kuehn, K.W., & Al-Busaidi, Y. (2002). Citizenship behavior in a non-Western context: An

examination of the role of satisfaction, commitment and job characteristics on self-

reported OCB. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 12(2), 107-126.

doi: 10.1108/eb047446



Lambert, S. (2006). Both art and science: Employing organizational documentation in

workplace-based research, in M. Pitt-Catsouphes, E.E. Kossek, & S. Sweet (eds.) The

work and family handbook: Multi-disciplinary perspectives, methods, and approaches.

503-525, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

LePine, J.A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D.E. (2002). The nature of dimensionality of organizational

citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,

87(1), 52-65. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.1.52

Markovits, Y., Davis, A.J., Fay, D., & Van Dick, R. (2010). The link between job satisfaction

and organizational commitment: Differences between public and private sector

employees. International Public Management Journal, 13(2), 177-196. doi:

10.1080/10967491003756682

McClelland, G.H., & Judd, C.M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and

moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114(2), 376-390. Retrieved from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8416037

McFarlane Shore, L. & Wayne, S.J. (1993). Commitment and employee behavior: Comparison

of affective commitment and continuance commitment with perceived organizational

support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5), 774-780. doi: 10.1037/0021-

9010.78.5.774

McGee, G.W., & Ford, R.C. (1987). Two (or more?) dimensions of organizational commitment:

Reexamination of the affective and continuance commitment scales. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 72(4), 638-641. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.638

Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., & Gellatly, I.R. (1990). Affective and continuance commitment to the

organization: Evaluation and measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged

relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 710-720. doi: 10.1037/0021-

9010.75.6.710

Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance,

and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents,



correlates and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20-52. doi:

10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842

Moorman, R.H., & Blakely, G.L. (1995). Individualism-collectivism as an individual difference

predictor of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior,

16(2), 127-142. doi: 10.1002/job.4030160204

Organ, D.W. (1988). OCB: The Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington Books: Lexington, Mass.

Powell, D.M., & Meyer, J.P. (2004). Side-bet theory and the three-component model of

organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(1), 157-177. doi:

10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00050-2

Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the organization:

The contribution of Perceived Organizational Support. Journal of Applied Psychology,

86(5), 825-836. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.825

Schappe, S.P. (1998). The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and fairness

perceptions on organizational citizenship behavior. The Journal of Psychology, 132(3),

277-290. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9540226

Spector, P.E. (1987). Method variance as an artifact in self-reported affect and perceptions at

work: Myth or significant problem? Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 438-443.

Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org

Spector, P.E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. Sage:

Thousand Oaks.

Vandenberghe, C. (2003). Application of the three- component model to China: Issues and

perspectives. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62(3), 516-523. doi: 10.1016/S0001-

8791(02)00066-0

Van Dyne, L., Graham, J., & Dienesch, R.M. (1994). Organizational Citizenship Behavior:

Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal,

37(4), 765-802, doi: 10.2307/256600



Van Knippenberg, D., Van Dick, R., & Tavares, S. (2007). Social identity and social exchange:

Identification, support, and withdrawal from the job. Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 37(3), 457-477. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00168.x

Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures

of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 54(6), 1063-1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063

Weiss, D.J., Dawis, R.V., England, G.W., & Lofquist, L.H. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota

Satisfaction Questionnaire, Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation Bulletin, 22:

120.

Williams, L.J., & Anderson, S.E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as

predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management,

17(3), 601-617. doi: 10.1177/014920639101700305



Author’s biography

Yannis Markovits teaches organizational behavior and human resource management in

Greece. He received his PhD in Management (work/organizational psychology) from Aston

Business School, Birmingham. He has worked both in public administration and private sector

organizations for more than twenty years in management and HR positions, and teaches at the

Institute of Education, National Centre of Public Administration and Local Government and at

the Alexander’s Technological Educational Institute. His research interests centre on

organizational commitment, job satisfaction, employee motivation, and employees’ training. Dr.

Markovits has authored articles, books, and book chapters, and presented his work in various

international scientific conferences. He serves as reviewer on academic journals, and he is

associate editor of the International Journal of the Academy of Organizational Behavior

Management and member of the editorial review board of the International Journal of

Management Science and Information Technology. He has also participated and supervised

various research projects and worked as national expert on missions and projects in Greece and

in the EU.