Organizational Commitment Questionaire

  • View
    215

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of Organizational Commitment Questionaire

  • 7/24/2019 Organizational Commitment Questionaire

    1/12

    W

    Journal of Social

    Sciences

    Winter 2012 Vol. 6 No. 2 135-145

    5

    Validation of the Three Component Mo del of Organizational

    Commitment Questionnaire

    Anela Maqsood

    Fatima Jinnah Women University, Rawalpindi

    Rubina Hanif and Ghazala Rehman

    Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan

    Wil l iams Glenn

    Nottingham Trent University, Nott ingham , UK

    The psychometr ic ev aluat ion of the m easurement m odels developed in Western cultures has remained an im portan t

    consideration in generalizability of the constructs. The present study was designed to test the theoretical factor

    structure of the Meyer and Al len's model of Organizat ional Commitment within higher education inst i tut ions in

    Pakistan. The measurement model assesses employees' experience of organizational commitment as three

    simultaneous mindsets encompassing; affect ive, continuance, and no rmative c om mitm ent. The part ic ipants included

    a sample of 426 regular faculty members of public and private sector Universities located in Rawalpindi, Islamabad,,

    and Lahore cities of P unjab, Pakistan. Confirm atory Factor Analysis was used to analyze the data. Results of fit

    indices, factor loadings, consideration of reliability indices, and an understanding of the rrieaning of the items in

    relation to the Pakistani working culture were used as decision criteria to retain or exclude items within respective

    factors . The findings of this study pro vide supp ort for the existing three fac tor struc ture of the OCQ along with th e

    need ior mo difica tion o f the Continuance C omm itmen t Scale. The findings we re discussed in light of a culture-based

    understanding of dynamics of work and commitment.

    Keywords: organizational com mitm ent, academics, construct val idi ty, cross-cultural di fferences, comm itmen t prof i le

    Studies on organizat ional commitment are dominant in

    the literature of management and behavioral sciences using

    variety of work sett ings. As a cr i t ical employee att i tude,

    com mitme nt has taken as a key compone nt of work behavior

    (Cetin, 2006; Cooper-Ha kim Viswesva ran, 2005; Dalai,

    2005; Herscovitch Me yer, 200 2; Riketta, 2002). Studies

    have shown that organizat ional commitment is an important

    constru ct to assess am ong teachers (Bogler Somech, 2004;

    Finegan,

    2000 ; Kushman, 1992; Shaw Reyes, 1992; Singh

    Billinsgley, 1998). Co mm itme nt is define d and measured in

    variety of ways depending on the research models being

    tested (Meyer A l len, 199 1; Mo rrow , 1993; Mowday,

    Porter, Steers, 1982). Defin itional issues suggest that

    generally com mitm ent is viewed as employees' psychological

    attachment or a bond (Armstrong, 1996). In a meta-analyt ic

    study (Cooper-Hakim Viswes varan, 2005) exam ining 997

    studies associated with organizat ional commitment, the

    authors found the presence of a comm on psychological

    construct underlying dif ferent forms of commitment, with

    the exception of calculat ive, continuance, and union

    commitment .

    Dimensionality of the construct

    Commitment appears to be a complex and mult i faceted

    construct (Meyer, Al len, Smith, 1993. Dif ferent efforts in

    Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed

    to Anela Maqsood , Fatima Jinnah Wo men Universi ty, Rawalpindi,

    Pakistan,

    Email : aneelamaq@vahoo.co.uk

    explaining the mult idimensional i ty of the commitment

    concept revealed some similarities between existing

    multidimensional models. Eariier studies (e.g. McGee

    Ford,

    1987;

    Mey er Allen , 1984) have emphasized that

    organizat ional commitment has two, possibly three,

    com pone nts (Allen Me yer, 1990) including affective,

    continuance and normative elements. Later, several other

    mult idimensional frameworks seem to have extended the

    existing conceptualizations of the construct (e.g. O'Reilly

    Chatman, 1986; Angle Perry,

    1981;

    Jaros, Jermier, Koehler,

    Sincich, 1993; Ma yer Schoo rman, 1998).

    The att i tudinal and behavioral dimensions of

    organizat ional commitment were dist inguished by Mowday,

    Porter, and Steers' (1982) model. Att i tudinal commitment

    ref lects the degree of employees' identi f icat ion with

    organizational goals and their will ingness to work towards

    these goals. Conversely, behavioral commitment represents

    an enactment of behaviors to bind the ennployee closer to'

    the organizat ion. Mowday and associates mentioned that a

    reciprocal relationship exists between both aspects of this

    kind of commitment. Based on this model (Mowday, Steers,

    Porter, 1979), Angle and Perry (1981) supp orted tw o

    underlying factors of commitment namely, acceptance of

    organizational goals and the will ingness to exert effort (value

    commitment) and desire to maintain membership of the

    organizat ion (continuance commitment). In simi lar l ines,

    subsequently, Mayer and Schoorman's (1992) model

    suggested that organizat ional commitment comprises two

  • 7/24/2019 Organizational Commitment Questionaire

    2/12

    Anela Ma qsood Rubina Hanif and Ghazala Rehman and Williams Glenn

    6

    dimensions referred as

    continuance commitment

    (desire to

    remain) and

    value commitment

    (will ingness to exert extra

    effort) .

    O'Reilly and Chatman's model (1986) focuses on

    commitment as an

    attitude

    towards the organizat ion that

    develops through various mechanisms. Their model argued

    that commitment could take three dist inct forms:

    compliance identification

    an d

    internalization.

    Compliance

    occurs when attitudes and corresponding behaviors are

    adopted in order to gain specific rewards. Identification is the

    stage, where individuals relate well to the organizational

    influences so that it positively influences their satisfaction

    towards the organization. Finally, internalization occurs

    when the organization's influence is assimilated into one's

    everyday perceptions because the attitudes and behaviors

    one is being encouraged to ad opt are congruent w ith exist ing

    values.

    Meyer and Al len's (1991) model of commitment

    integrates numerous defini t ions of commitment that have

    prol i ferated in the l i terature and can be conceptual ized

    according to three main elements namely through its

    affect ive, continuance, and normative forms of commitment.

    Affect ive com mitm ent as the nature and qual i ty of wo rk

    experiences that affect employees' posit ive emotional

    attachment to an organization and is characterized by strong

    l inks with an organizat ion through identi fying with i t and by

    being actively involved in organizational processes. In

    explaining affect ive commitment, identi f icat ion (Etzioni,

    1975; Mowday et al . , 1982) expressed through the adoption

    of organizational goals occurs when individuals take pride in

    the organization, participate with intense interest in its

    act ivi t ies, and speak posit ively about their connection with

    the organizat ion-

    Continuance commitment is related to Becker's (1960)

    theory and Herbiniak and Alutto's (1972) conceptual izat ion

    of commitment as a cost- induced desire to remain in the

    organizat ion. Continuance commitment ref lects feel ings of

    being stuck in one's present position (Angle & Lawson,

    1993). Continuance commitment includes perceptions of

    high sacrifice and having few alternatives (Reilly & Orsak,

    1991). Furthermore, normative commitment ref lects an

    employee's feelings of obl igat ion tow ard the organizat ion; an

    individual committed to the organizat ion on a normative

    basis engages in activities on the basis of a sense of duty.

    Wiener (1982) suggested that employees behave in

    accordance wi th organizational goals because they believe it

    is the r ight and moral thing to do (p. 421). Normative

    commitment describes a process whereby organizat ional

    actions (e.g. selection, socialization, procedure), as well as

    individual pre-dispositions such as personal organizational

    value congruence and general ized loyalty or a dut i ful

    att i tude, lead to the development of organizat ional

    commitment (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990).

    These three types of commitment ref lect a l ink between

    an oi-ganization and an employee and distinguish between

    commitment based on a desire to stay, need to stay, and

    obligation to stay in an organization. Allen and Meyer (1990)

    provided empir ical support that each compon ent represents

    a somewhat dist inct l ink between employees and an

    organization that develops as the result of different work

    experiences. Therefore, the l ink betweeh commitment and

    on-the-job behavior may vary as a function of the strength of

    the three components. Further, these components of

    commitment are not mutual ly exclusive: an employee can

    simultaneously be committed to an organizat ion in an

    affective, continuance, and normative sense, at varying level

    of intensity (Popper & Lipshitz, 1992). Based on Allen and

    Meyer's framework. Jaros et al. (1993) suggested a

    mult idimensional conceptual izat ion namely, affect ive,

    continuance, and moral com mitm ent. The dif ference here lay

Recommended

View more >