COMMITMENT

WHAT IS COMMITMENT A great business leader once said: "...the basic philosophy, spirit, and drive of an organization have far more to do with its relative achievements than do technological or economic resources, organizational structure, innovation, and timing. All these things weigh heavily in success. But they are, I think, transcended by how strongly the people in the organization believe in its basic precepts and how faithfully they carry them out." (from Thomas J. Watson, Jr., A Business and its Beliefs - The ideas that helped build IBM). As true as this is for the success of a corporation, it is even more so for the individual. The most important single factor in individual success is COMMITMENT. Commitment ignites action. To commit is to pledge yourself to a certain purpose or line of conduct. It also means practicing your beliefs consistently. There are, therefore, two fundamental conditions for commitment. The first is having a sound set of beliefs. There is an old saying that goes, "Stand for something or you'll fall for anything." The second is faithful adherence to those beliefs with your behavior. Possibly the best description of commitment is "persistence with a purpose". Many successful business people are hailed as visionary leaders. On careful inspection they are found to be individuals who hold firmly to a simple set of commitments, usually grounded in beliefs such as "the best product money can buy", or the highest possible customer service". It is the strength of these commitments, religiously followed, that led to their business success. WHERE TO PRACTICE It appears that effective leaders hold dearly to a half dozen commitments. The first, and most basic, of these is a commitment to a set of values, principles or beliefs. These underlying principles define both the organization's uniqueness and the fundamental direction in which it wants to head. This first commitment leads to a common vision and purpose within the organization. The second commitment is to oneself, to how one acts as a leader. An effective leader possesses a strong sense of personal integrity and self confidence. This leads to a willingness to share the credit for success. Another side to this commitment is a deliberate emphasis on continual selfimprovement. The combination of a strong, positive commitment to self and to a set of principles serve as a foundation to effectively maintain the remaining four commitments. These commitments are to: customers, results, employees, and the organization.

Everyone has a customer and is a customer to someone else. Customers are usually thought of as external to the organization who needs your product or service. A question worth asking is, "How much are others willing to pay for my work?" The price your customers are willing to pay measures its values in their eyes. Besides serving customers, all organizations target specific results. Given the large number of demands placed on all of us, it is important to concentrate on achieving the most important goals and objectives. Commitment to results is largely determined by how clear priorities are, what actions get rewarded, and what risks are being taken to improve intended results. The next commitment is to the people. The quality of the organization's commitment to customers and results is largely based upon the quality of its commitment to people. The simple reason for this is that it is these people who serve the customer and achieve results. How are people treated in the organization? Commitment to people is largely the product of treating people with respect, challenging them, and giving them effective feedback on how they are doing. The final leadership commitment is to the larger organization. Other departments, higher management, the organization's overall strategy & mission are important. Communication is the key with this commitment. How people talk to, and about, each other greatly affects the quality of cooperation. How open are the channels of communication up, down, and across? Can management be challenged? Will people support management decisions and changes? Balancing all six commitments is the key to well directed leadership. When management supports its employees, they will be able and willing to achieve intended results, When these results support customer needs and expectations, customers will support the organization with their business. A strong and healthy organization can then continue to show commitment to its people. The glue that holds this process together is the values and leaders in the organization. HOW TO PRACTICE COMMITMENT Effectively demonstrating commitment to others, to the organization's basic principles, and to oneself is never easy. The truth is, demonstrating commitment is hard work. Wavering commitment is usually seen as no commitment at all. The only way to achieve a reputation for commitment is through determination and persistence. Genuine commitment stands the test of time. Day to day, commitment is demonstrated by a combination of two actions. The first action is called supporting. Genuine support develops a commitment in the minds and hearts of others. This is accomplished by focusing on what is important and leading by example. It is not uncommon for people to be either confused as to what is important, or lose sight of it over time. Supporting means concentrating on what adds value, spotlighting what's working, and rewarding others who are focusing on what is important and leading by example. A crucial aspect of true support is standing up to those who would undermine commitment, those whose words or actions show disrespect.

The second action underlying commitment is called improving. Improving stretches our commitment to an even higher level. Commitment means a willingness to look for a better way and learn from the process. It focuses on eliminating complacency, confronting what is not working, and providing incentives for improvement. The spirit of improving is rooted in challenging current expectation and ultimately taking the risk to make changes. These changes are based more on an optimism in the future than dissatisfaction in the past. It is embodied in the reply of car maker Professor Porsche, who, when asked which was his favorite model in the long line of Porsche automobiles replied: "I haven't built it yet!" It is the combination of both supporting and improving behaviors that makes up the practice of commitment. Separately neither action is capable of sustaining commitment. Promoting alone can come across as a shallow and pollyannish. Continuous improvement can be seen as "good is never good enough". Together they provide a needed balance. Both are essential to commitment. WHEN IT IS MOST IMPORTANT Commitment is most difficult and most readily proven during tough times. How someone weathers the storms most clearly demonstrates their basic beliefs. In antiquity, Epicurus stated: "...a captain earns his reputation during the storms." When your competition scores big against you, when the money dries up, or when the glamour of success wears off, this is when it is easiest to compromise your commitments. The real test comes when you can hold the line against the easy route of compromise. Fortunately, paying the price that commitment commands has payoffs worth the cost - a reputation for integrity and, even more important, the commitment of others in return. Commitment is a two-way street. You only get it if you are willing to give it.

How commitment affects team performance employee commitment

Employees' commitment to their work teams and to the organization can influence turnover, willingness to help co-workers and team performance. Building employee commitment to the workplace is one important goal of human resource policies and practices. Research shows commitment has a positive effect on productivity, turnover and employees willingness to help co-workers. But the downsizing, wage erosion and productivity demands of recent years have reduced this commitment. While commitment has been declining, the use of work teams has been on the rise. Recent data indicate 47 percent of Fortune 1000 companies use teams to some extent, and 60 percent plan to increase the use of teams in the near future. Employers believe teams can enhance productivity while giving employees a more active role in decision-making and a greater opportunity to be involved in meaningful work. But team success is often dependent on high levels of employee commitment - to both the organization and its goals. THE IMPORTANCE OF COMMITMENT In assessing employees' attachment, it is important to determine the focus of their commitment. Different individuals may have different "profiles of commitment"; they may be highly committed to the team, but not to the organization, or committed to both, or committed to neither. Studies have shown that commitment to a team may translate into a willingness to help team members(1) and improved team performance.(2) Low levels of commitment to both the organization(3) and the team(4) have been linked to absenteeism, turnover and intention to quit. But no study had been done to explore the causes of both team and organizational commitment and the effect they have on productivity, willingness to help team members, and intention to quit. THE SETTING FOR THE STUDY This study was conducted in an apparel manufacturing plant owned by a Fortune 100 company in the mid-Atlantic region. The plant had fifty 10-person sewing teams with a small support staff of team facilitators, managers, maintenance personnel and material handlers. All employees on sewing teams took part in the survey, and plant management reported no unusual absence patterns during the survey period. The organization had implemented work teams as part of its strategy to keep jobs from going overseas. Teams had been in place at the plant for just over two years. According to management, team sewing had increased productivity, improved quality, and decreased turnover and absenteeism

(though turnover did increase when teams were first introduced). The use of teams also significantly reduced in-process inventory and turnaround time for customer orders. Compensation was based on a team production system with minimum performance standards set by industrial engineers. Team members were compensated at the same rate, based on the percentage of the standard. FACTORS AFFECTING COMMITMENT Certain conditions that are of primary importance in self-directed work team environments affect both organizational and team commitment. Because the following characteristics have a dual relationship with self-directed work team environments and commitment, they were chosen as independent variables for this study: * Satisfaction with supervision. * Resource-related role conflict: the ability of employees to access the tools they need to perform the job as requested. * Task interdependence: the degree to which team members rely on one another to complete work assignments. * Intersender conflict: the degree to which employees receive conflicting orders or requests from superiors or co-workers, or orders that conflict with company policy, ethical standards or legal requirements. * Satisfaction with co-workers. Effects on organizational commitment. We found that satisfaction with supervision and resourcerelated conflict had significant positive and negative influences on organizational commitment, respectively, but no significant influence on team commitment. Task interdependence had positive and significant influences on both organizational and team commitment. Although task interdependence had an impact on team commitment, it was not significant. In general, these findings supported our hypothesis that commitment resulting from satisfaction with supervision would focus more strongly on the organization than on the team. Prior research had indicated that in work team environments, many employees view supervisors as representatives of the company and, often, an extension of it.(5) Adequate material resources are critical to work team effectiveness. Lack of resources is often a major cause of poor team performance. We hypothesized that resource-related conflict would be strongly related to organizational commitment because organizations are responsible for providing the resources and materials employees need to do their work and earn their pay. Companies that do not provide these resources break the reciprocal relationship that stimulates employees to put forth effort, a component of commitment. This broken relationship has a negative effect on organizational commitment.

Because task-related interchanges take place within teams, we expected that the interdependent nature of their tasks would be more conspicuous. As a result, we thought this perception of task interdependence would have a greater effect on team commitment than on organizational commitment, but our results indicated this was not the case. The influence of task interdependence on organizational commitment was not significantly different from its influence on team commitment. The reason for this result may have to do with circumstances in the plant. Teams had been in place for a little over two years and the majority of employees worked at this location when teams were introduced. The change was mandated by the company, team structure was designed by the company, and task integration was engineered by the company. Employees were most likely aware of the company's influence in creating this interdependence, so the organization remained the focus of commitment. Effects on team commitment. As we expected, task interdependence and satisfaction with coworkers had positive influences on team commitment, while intersender conflict had a negative effect. We believed satisfaction with co-workers would be particularly important in a selfdirected work team environment. Because a key feature of self-directed work teams is the high degree of self-determination in managing work, teams take on many of the responsibilities formal supervisors once had and their members must undergo a considerable transition in terms of their role requirements. To make this transition successfully, members must learn to work together to overcome conflicts and "promote both group creativity and member satisfaction."(6) We found that satisfaction with co-workers significantly affected team commitment, but not organizational commitment. Intersender conflict had a negative impact on team commitment. We hypothesized this would result because in self-directed work team environments, the distribution of tasks and the pace of the work are usually decided and communicated within the team. As a result, the source of any intersender conflict that occurs is most likely within the team. HOW COMMITMENT AFFECTS EMPLOYEES Because managers at the plant believed implementing teams had influenced morale, absenteeism and employees' willingness to help others, they were very interested in the effects organizational and team commitment have on production, intention to quit and willingness to help team members. Commitment significantly influenced team productivity, intention to quit and willingness to help. However, commitment to the team and the organization did not influence all the outcomes equally. For example, when team commitment and organizational commitment decrease, intention to quit increases. But only organizational commitment had a direct influence on intention to quit. The influence of team commitment on intention to quit, when the influence of all other variables is considered, was not significant.

Team productivity. Team commitment led to increased productivity, but organizational commitment did not. This result did not surprise us because we expected that the team would have the greatest effect on productivity. We were surprised that resource-related conflict positively influenced team productivity. This result is counterintuitive, but may be explained by the increased sensitivity employees whose pay is tied to production have for a lack of resources. A short delay in obtaining materials may be very important to these individuals, while the same delay may not be noticed by those less concerned with production. Intention to quit. Prior research indicates that organizational commitment is related to intention to quit - often used as proxy for turnover. We found that a high commitment to the organization translated into lower intention to quit, but that commitment to the team did not have a significant effect on intention to quit. This finding is consistent with our hypothesis. After all, an employee who is not committed to the team may choose to change teams while staying with the company, but one who is not committed to the organization has few choices of action. There is a relationship between team commitment and intention to quit - which is important to be aware of but the relationship is not causal. Many times organizations have problems that result from what has been termed intersender conflict - employees receiving conflicting orders from two or more superiors, conflicting requests from co-workers; or orders that conflict with company policy, ethical standards, or even the law. We noticed that when intersender conflict increased, so did intention to quit. Though we did not hypothesize this relationship, we feel it is reasonable since in a work team environment, most of the interaction that may lead to intersender conflict takes place within the team. Willingness to help. Willingness to help was positively influenced by both organizational and team commitment. We hypothesized that team commitment would positively influence willingness to help, because of a desire of those committed to their team to put forth effort on its behalf. However, the data indicate that the path from organizational commitment to willingness to help does not differ significantly from the path from team commitment to willingness to help. We also found that task interdependence - the extent to which individuals in the work group interact and depend on one another to accomplish their work - had a significant and positive influence on willingness to help. Apparently those who perceive high levels of task interdependence are also more willing to help their teammates. IMPROVING TEAM PERFORMANCE Satisfaction with supervision had a positive effect on organizational commitment, while resource-related conflict had a negative effect. Satisfaction with coworkers had a positive effect on team commitment, but resource-related conflict had a negative effect. And both organizational and team commitment were positively affected by task interdependence. Managers may be able to increase employee commitment by focusing attention on specific variables.

1. Engage teams in team building exercises and training - this increases commitment to the team by increasing members' satisfaction with each other and by reducing intersender conflict.

2. Train first-level supervisors to be visible and alert to teams' needs. This is especially challenging in self-directed work team environments, where working as independently from direct supervision as possible is one of the goals. 3. Pay special attention to inventory control, maintenance and repair issues, and the availability of supplies. Downtime may cost the company more than just lost productivity; it may have a negative effect on organizational commitment. 4. Pay close attention to production procedures and technical and team training for employees. High levels of task interdependence have positive effects on organizational and team commitment, and a direct influence on employees' willingness to help each other.

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITTMENT
The concept of organisational commitment has attracted considerable attention over recent years and has become a central objective of human resource management.As Guest, 1987 indicated, HRM policies are designed to maximiseorganisational integration, employee commitment, flexibility and quality of work . For the topic in question our focal interest refers to Commitment which can be described as attachment and loyalty. Individuals can display this attachment and loyalty at a variety of levels: their job, profession, department, boss or organisation. Realistically then, commitment may therefore be diverse and divided between any of these. More specifically, organisational commitment has been defined by Mowdray, 1992 as consisting of three components: an identification with the goals and values of the organisation, a desire to belong to theorganisation and a willingness to display effort on behalf of the organisation. 3 This essay will therefore analyse the notion of organisational commitment, and consider its strengths and weaknesses in determining why managers would want it in their workforce. In addition this essay will also highlight whether there is any cost-effective way to secure commitment.

The term commitment can be defined in various ways. This bond has three forms:- Compliance, Identification and Internalisation. Similarly Meyer &Allen have proposed a three-component model, which highlights affective commitment (individuals want to be attached to the organisation) , continuance commitment (individuals feel they need to be attached to the organisation) and normative commitment (individuals feel they ought to remain with the organisation). These various types of commitment will have varying effects on the organisations performance and a person can display aspects of all of them. There are two schools of thought of HRM, which have had a significant effect on the importance and development of commitment. The first one highlights the hard school of HRM, which has itsorigins in Taylorism. Up until the 1980s the main concerns of management were the organisations strategy and structure with an emphasis on the technical aspects of work. People were seen as a resource to be spent like any other.5 Contrary to this view is the soft school of HRM. This view recognises that people are motivated by a complex set of factors that are interrelated, such as money, the need for affiliation or achievement and the desire for meaningful work. This view focuses on employees as potential talents and it is managements responsibility to learn how best to attract and retain these resources. A shift in the thinking and values of managers during that period was coupled with various writers emphasising the importance of commitment i.e., such as the article written by Walton From control to commitment .6 Walton saw a commitment strategy as a more rewarding approach to HRM in contrast to the traditional control strategy. He suggested that workers respond best not when they are tightly controlled by management, placed in narrowly defined jobs and told what to do but instead when they are given broader responsibilities and encouraged to participate. Similarly, other writers such as Peters & Waterman, 1982, (the culture-excellence approach) focused on 8 attributes, which they said, were necessary for companies to get their culture right. Their main focus was an emphasis on productivity through people. In todays dynamic world and increased job insecurity, the job for life is no longer existent. One can therefore question whether the concept of organisational commitment is now becoming redundant?7 People constantly fear their jobs and loose their motivation and commitment to work. For example, since October, 2008, thousands of job cuts have been announced across all sectors of the UK economy. These include companies such as BAE Systems, Lloyds Banking Group, Japanese electronics firm Toshiba, Royal

Bank of Scotland, insurance giant Norwich Union, Telecoms Company Nortel and many more.8 Employees need to be reassured that their jobs are secure; otherwise they wont exert as much effort in achieving organisational objectives. A study by the International Survey Research revealed that British staff are the most dissatisfied in the EU, with only 22% feeling secure in their jobs. This insecurity is the root of lack of feel good factor9. Furthermore commitment also conflicts with the notion of flexibility. Numerical flexibility has been a predominant feature of recent years, with 'downsizing' and 'delayering' being an obsession of many large companies. A climate of fear has been created for those peopleremaining. However one must consider that even if organisations are moving towards the flexible firm 10, nevertheless there will always be a core group of workers and it is important to retain their commitment to the organisation. In addition, organisations are increasingly relying on outsourcing to meet their labour force requirements, by hiring temporary workers or independent contractors.11This highlights further complexities, concerning which company the employee is committed to i.e., whether it is the organisation they were originally employed by or the place they are currently working. In general, writers have cited various reasons why an organisation would want to increase the level of commitment among its members.12 It has been argued that having a committed workforce is seen as the key factor in achieving competitive performance . Research has found that the more committed the employee is to the organisation, the greater the effort exerted by the employee in performing tasks. Highly committed employees wish to remain associated with the organisation and advance organisational goals, and are therefore less likely to leave (employee retention is seen to be highest with all forms of commitment). This highlights a positive relationship between the level of organisational commitment and job tenure13, which ensures a return on the investment in careful selection, training and development. However having a low labour turnover is not always a positive factor. For example in times of change some turnover is desirable to bring in new people, new ideas, and more diverse thinking. In addition, if employees with continuance commitment are staying in the organisation because they are not able to get jobs elsewhere this wont help the productivity of the organisation. Furthermore Meyer & Allen have illustrated a positively correlated relationship between affective commitment and work attendance. In particular suspicious type absences were lower i.e., a committed

worker will be more eager about their job and more motivated to dedicate a lot of time and effort to accomplish the tasks required. However one must bear in mind how reliable these questions are, that simply ask the employee whether they were off work for voluntary or involuntary reasons? In-role job performance has been reported to be higher for employees with strong affective commitment. The underlying assumption is that they will work harder at their jobs and perform them better than those with weaker commitment. This has been positively correlated to self-reported measures of work effort and to adherence toorganisational policy. However in the presence of other studies,these results may appear conflicting. Research undertaken by DeCotis& Summers, 87 displayed no correlation between performance dimensions and managers affective commitment.14 Thus we can postulate that the association between performance and affective commitment is neither very strong nor is the effect on performance very large.15 Hence, there seems to be a stronger association with extra-rolebehaviour and affective commitment. Employees with strong affective commitment are more willing to engage in citizenshipbehaviour than those with weaker affective commitment. Committed workers can be expected to exercise responsible autonomy or self-control, removing the need for supervisory staff and producing efficiency gains. Therefore commitment in the workforce moves away from the traditional psychological contract of a fair days work for a fair days pay and instead to a contract, which implies that employees will go that extra mile for the company.16 On the personal level, there are benefits for strong affective commitment i.e., working in an environment in which one is positive about has implications for reduced stress levels. Alternatively, affective commitment could lead to negative consequences for life beyond the organisation. However Meyer & Allen have refuted this claim. Further research has investigated the link between organisational commitment and the delivery of service quality. Even though the link between them is not very strong, it is found that organisational commitment is strongly tied to role ambiguity and teamwork as antecedents of the service delivery gap17. Therefore obtaining affective and normative commitment from employees may have positive effects for the organisation, even though some of the magnitudes of the findings are not very high. Further, one must take into consideration that in times of organisational change, employees with affective commitment may be a barrier to change. This is because they are committed to a single

set of values and goals and wont be able to cope with prevalent uncertainties and as a result may resist this change. However organisations can increase employee commitment by providing them with fair and reasonable working practices in a rather cost-effective way. To stay committed, employees should feel valued and recognised by management. A current survey highlighted that the majority of employees in Britain's biggest organisations feel undervalued and
1

uninvolved. The key findings showed that only 9% strongly agree that their views and participation are valued by their organisation and that only 27% are strongly committed to help their organisation succeed. It also shows that low levels of commitment are portrayed across all levels of staff: managers are only slightly more committed than non-managers to organisational goals, and show no more understanding of goals than their staff. 18 These are startling results, because if managers lack commitment how can they possibly be expected to manage and motivate others? Good communication and feedback between management and employees is a means to reduce these problems. Kevin Thomson quotes: With the one-way process of communication failing in many UK companies, it is hardly surprising that our respondents feel unvalued.19. A positive relationship between communication and commitment was detected highlighting the importance for management to ensure that communication channels remain open to allow for better transmission of information20. Other HR practices, such as recruitment and selection, also play an important role in gaining employee commitment (Meyer & Allen). By providing realistic job previews and accurate information, applicants are better able to determine whether the job is appropriate for them. If they are aware of the available choices, applicants will be more dedicated to the organisation that they opt for. Similarly, selection procedures try to identify those individuals who are likely to be committed to work. This is done through various methods such as psychometric testing. However all individuals vary in their propensity to become committed, due to personal characteristics, preentry expectations or organisational choice variables. After the initial recruitment of an employee, induction training andsocialisation are carried out, which are vital in gaining employee commitment. It is essential to reinforce a sense of self-worth within newcomers, which can be achieved through a supportive environment. According to Tannenbaum, 199121, training is an important part of the socialisation process. He found a strong positive correlation between commitment and employees motivation

for training. Training should be continuous to give employees a sense of recognition and the feeling that their development is valued by the organisation. Job satisfaction is said to have the largest effect on commitment. Therefore, this factor should be increased to improve an employees commitment to an organisation.This can be done by providing performance appraisals, reward systems or benefits, which are perceived as fair and satisfactory. Since there is a positive relationship between satisfaction with performance appraisal and commitment22, management need to ensure that their performance appraisal systems is perceived by employees to be fair before they can expect higher commitment from them. In terms of assessment and promotion, the fairness in the decision making process is crucial for commitment. The organisation should communicate clearly how decisions are made and why some people and not others did get promotions. Compensation programmes such as ESOPs can create a sense of commitment within the organisation. Companies, which are undertaking this method, are United Airlines (which is 55% owned by its employees), British Petroleum, (which is 100% owned by its employees) and Pfizer.23 This method positively affects employee motivation and makes them feel owners of the company. Research suggests that companies, which have implemented ESOPs, tend to boost employee productivity and sales growth.24 However ESOPs can also decrease affective commitment, because they require employees to stay for a period of time to receive their contribution, increasing costs to the organisation. In terms of pursuing a costeffective method, consideration needs to be given to these schemes. It is therefore possible for organisations to influence their employees commitment through HRM policies and practices. However the difficulty with these policies is that they dont operate in isolation and need to be compatible with the overall business strategy. But if done effectively they can produce positive results. For example, Huselids use of High Performance Work Practices indicates a decrease in turnover and higher levels of productivity and corporate financial success. Research undertaken by John E. Finnigan, indicates that perception of the organisations values is the strongest predictor of employee commitment. This emphasises the importance for organisations to display fairness across all their practices and policies. In conclusion, its easy for organisations to say that people are our most important assets or the source of our competitive advantage. But its much more difficult to provide evidence, especially at a time

when downsizing is so prevalent. However by placing organisational commitment at the core of the definition of HRM is an attempt to win the hearts and minds of the workforce. We must bear in mind that the focus of commitment goes further than simple compliance:it is an emotional attachment to the organisation. Therefore the way people are managed has a major impact on their commitment and on organisational performance. Advantages of gaining employee commitment have been perceived to be lower labour turnover, extra rolebehaviour, better product quality and employee flexibility leading to the firms competitive advantage. Thus, given the contribution that a highly productive trained employee can make to organisational productivity, keeping such an employee should be a high priority to the organisation. Organisations can secure this commitment by engaging in fair HR practices such as procedural justice, good communication, increased participation, more supportive management and reasonable rewards.