The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 20, No.

12, December 2009, 24942516

Employee organizational commitment: the inuence of cultural and organizational factors in the Australian manufacturing industry
Sophia Su*, Kevin Baird and Bill Blair
Department of Accounting and Finance, EFS, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia The importance of enhancing employee organizational commitment (EOC) is highlighted by the extensive literature revealing its positive impact on employees job performance, reducing absenteeism and turnover rates, and improving employees adaptability to organizational change. This study provides an insight into how EOC levels can be enhanced by examining the contextual factors that can inuence EOC. Specically, the study examines the association between cultural, organizational, and demographic factors with the level of EOC in the Australian manufacturing industry. Data were collected by a survey questionnaire from a random sample of 500 managers with the results revealing that two cultural factors (outcome orientation and stability) and three organizational factors (organizational size, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction) were found to be signicantly associated with the level of EOC. Further analysis provides a preliminary insight into how to enhance the EOC of specic managers with different cultural and organizational factors found to be associated with the EOC of managers at different levels in the organizational hierarchy. The ndings have important implications for practitioners attempting to improve the level of EOC of their employees with the subsequent enhancements in the level of EOC likely to contribute to improvements in productivity and growth in the Australian manufacturing industry. Keywords: employee organizational commitment (EOC); job satisfaction; manufacturing industry; organizational culture; perceived organizational support

Introduction Employee organizational commitment (EOC) reects employees identication with the organizations goals and values; their willingness to exert a great effort on behalf of the organization; and their intention to stay with the organization (Porter, Steers, Mowday and Boulian 1974). The importance of EOC is highlighted by the extensive literature which has focused on EOC as a potential determinant of employee motivation, and staff absenteeism and turnover rates (Porter et al. 1974; Mathieu and Zajac 1990; Hackett, Peter and Hausdorf 1994; Ko, Price and Mueller 1997; Agarwala 2003; Meyer, Becker and Vandenberghe 2004; Smeenk, Eisinga, Teelken and Doorewaard 2006; Bhatnagar 2007). For example, Pool and Pool (2007) maintain that EOC plays a signicant role in creating an organizational environment that promotes motivation and job satisfaction in the workplace. In addition, Gellatly (1995) suggested that EOC is a powerful predictor of absenteeism while Stallworth (2004) found that there is a negative correlation between the level of EOC and an employees intention to search for job alternatives and to leave ones job.

*Corresponding author. Email: xsu@efs.mq.edu.au

ISSN 0958-5192 print/ISSN 1466-4399 online q 2009 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/09585190903363813 http://www.informaworld.com

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2495

Given the importance of EOC, the overall objective of this study is to provide practitioners with an insight into how they can enhance the level of EOC within their organization. The study aims to achieve this objective by extending the literature examining the contextual factors that can inuence EOC. Accordingly, this studys overall objective is categorized into three main objectives: to examine the association between (i) cultural, (ii) organizational and (iii) demographic factors with the level of EOC in the Australian manufacturing industry. The rst objective is to examine the association between cultural factors with the level of EOC. Despite the claim that critical outcomes such as EOC and employee performance are affected by an organizations prevailing culture (Nystrom 1993), only a few studies (Nystrom 1993; Lok and Crawford 1999, 2001; McKinnon, Harrison, Chow and Wu 2003; McMurray, Scott and Pace 2004) have examined the association between organizational culture and the level of EOC, with McMurray et al. (2004) the only study conducted within the Australian manufacturing industry. Each of these studies incorporated small sample sizes (maximum of 13 organizations). Accordingly, the motivation for examining the association between organizational culture and EOC is the dearth of studies examining this relationship. Furthermore, the study aims to contribute to the literature by examining this association using a large sample size and by focusing on the Australian manufacturing industry. Specically, the study will explore the association between EOC with the six dimensions of culture attributed to OReilly, Chatham and Caldwells (1991) Organizational Culture Prole (OCP) measure: team work; respect for people; outcome orientation; innovation; stability; and attention to detail. The second objective of the study is to examine the association between organizational factors with the level of EOC. Specically, the study hypothesizes the association between ve organizational factors (organizational size, training, link to rewards, perceived organizational support, and job satisfaction) with the level of EOC. While the ve organizational factors examined do not represent an exhaustive list of factors associated with the level of EOC, they are chosen as examples of the factors that have been examined in past studies. Previous studies have produced mixed ndings in respect to the association between three of these factors (organizational size, training, and job satisfaction) and the level of EOC. It is hoped that the current study can contribute to resolving such conicts. In addition, the study will contribute to the literature by examining the association between organizational factors and the level of EOC for employees possessing specic demographic characteristics. A third objective of the study is to assess the association between specic demographic factors with the level of EOC. Consistent with previous research the study examines if there is any association between gender, age, education, salary, duration of employment, and position level1 with the level of EOC. While these relationships are examined they are not the primary focus of the study and hence no formal hypotheses are developed. The motivation for incorporating these demographic details in the study is two-fold. First, the results should prove to be interesting and assist organizations by making them aware of the manner in which EOC levels may differ amongst their managers based on the specic demographic characteristics of individual employees. Second, the ndings will facilitate a more extensive examination of the association between the cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC. Specically, it is intended that any identied divergences in respect to the level of EOC based on demographics will be further explored by examining the association between the cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC for employees with differing demographic characteristics. Such ndings will assist organizations in attempting to improve the level of EOC of specic managers.

2496

S. Su et al.

This paper is organized as follows. The next section denes EOC and outlines the benets of higher levels of EOC for organizations. This is followed by a discussion of the association between the cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC. We then discuss the use of the survey method to gather data, and provide details concerning the measurement of each of the variables. The results are then presented and, nally, the conclusions, limitations and future directions for research are discussed. Employee organizational commitment (EOC) There are various denitions of EOC in the literature. Some studies dene EOC from an attitude perspective (Mowday, Porter and Steers 1982; OReilly 1989), while other studies dene EOC from a behavioral perspective (Meyer and Allen 1997). In this study, the denition of EOC is adopted from Porter et al. (1974) who dened EOC as an employees identication with the organizations goals and values; their willingness to exert a great effort on behalf of the organization; and their intention to stay with the organization. This denition is preferred as it denes EOC from both the attitudinal and behavioural perspectives. Meyer and Allen (1991) provide a more in-depth analysis of EOC classifying it into three components: affective; continuance; and normative commitment. Affective commitment is dened as an employees emotional attachment to a particular organization which makes them willing to assist in the achievement of the organizations goals. Continuance commitment refers to an employees awareness of the costs related to leaving an organization, while normative commitment is dened as a feeling of obligation to continue employment in the organization. Employees with a high level of normative commitment feel that they ought to stay with the organization as it is the moral thing to do (Meyer and Allen 1991). Two of these three components are beyond the control of management. First, in regard to continuance commitment, employees who live closer to the company would be expected to have a higher level of continuance commitment compared with those who live further away from the company. Second, normative commitment may result from employees internalization of normative pressures before they enter into the organization such as familial socialization. For example, employees may have been told by their family members that to be loyal to their organization is important. Hence, continuous commitment and normative commitment are both beyond the control of management and therefore outside the scope of the current study. Alternatively, the degree of an employees affective commitment is dependent upon their attitude towards the organization which may be inuenced by their organizational environment. Accordingly, this study focuses on the association between specic cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC as assessed by the level of affective commitment.

Benets of EOC From a broad perspective, a high level of EOC can benet society because of the decrease in job movement and the increase in national productivity and/or work quality (Mathieu and Zajac 1990; Chow 1994). From a narrower perspective, EOC remains important for organizations because of its potential impact on employees job performance (Mathieu and Zajac 1990; MacKenzie, Podsakoff and Aheame 1998; Ketchand and Strawser 2001; Riketta 2002), employee turnover (Mathieu and Zajac 1990; Ketchand and Strawser 1998; Stallworth 2004) and acceptance of organizational change by employees (Lau and Woodman 1995; Iverson 1996; Yousef 2000; Nikolaou and Vakola 2005).

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2497

According to Porter et al. (1974) employees who exhibit a higher level of EOC are more likely to exert effort on behalf of their organization, thereby resulting in better performance. This positive link between EOC and job performance has been supported by a number of prior studies (Meyer, Paunonen, Cellatly, Gofn and Jackson 1989; Meyer, Allen and Smith 1993; Hackett et al. 1994; Jaramillo, Mulki and Marshall 2005). Studies have consistently shown a strong negative relationship between EOC and employee turnover (Ketchand and Strawser 1998; Meyer and Allen 1997; Iverson and Buttigieg 1999; Stallworth 2004). Specically, employees with a higher level of organizational commitment are less likely to consider alternative job opportunities and are less likely to actually leave their organization for other employment (Mathieu and Zajac 1990). Chow (1994) found that highly committed employees have greater loyalty and are more likely to remain in their organizations. Given the high costs related to hiring and training new staff and the low productivity and staff morale which tends to be associated with employee turnover (Koh and Boo 2004), organizations should focus on EOC as a means of reducing employee turnover rates. In addition to the impact on employees job performance and turnover, EOC has been found to play an important role in employees acceptance of organizational change. In Australia, employees are experiencing various organizational changes such as downsizing, the introduction of new plant and technology, and internationalization of businesses (Savery and Luks 2000). The costs associated with organizational change include the costs resulting from an employees resistance to change. Specically, employees uncertainty and fear in dealing with new situations can lower organizations productivity and morale (Mack, Nelson and Quick 1998; Nikolaou and Vakola 2005). As a result, employees acceptance of organizational change becomes extremely important for organizations to manage. Iverson (1996) suggested that EOC is one of the most important determinants of employees attitudes towards organizational change. Similarly, Lau and Woodman (1995) argued that highly committed employees are more likely to accept organizational change as they are more willing to expend more effort to adapt to new situations. Factors affecting the level of EOC Organizational culture Organizational culture refers to a system of shared values and norms that dene appropriate attitudes and behaviours for organizational members (OReilly and Chatman 1996, p. 160). It is one of the fundamental factors in developing and maintaining a high level of organizational commitment among employees (OReilly 1989). However, few studies have investigated the effect of organizational culture on the level of EOC (Nystrom 1993; Lok and Crawford 1999, 2001; McKinnon et al. 2003; McMurray et al. 2004). Australian studies are limited to Lok and Crawford (1999, 2001) who tested the link between organizational culture and the level of EOC in an Australian hospital context, and McMurray et al. (2004) who conducted their study in three South Australian manufacturing companies. Given that McMurray et al. (2004) is the only study conducted within the Australian manufacturing industry, a gap exists in the literature in respect to studies examining EOC in this industry in Australia. In addition, prior studies examining the link between organizational culture and the level of EOC have incorporated relatively small sample sizes (13 organizations in Nystrom (1993); seven organizations in Lok and Crawford (1999, 2001); one organization in McKinnon et al. (2003) and three organizations in McMurray et al. (2004)). According to

2498

S. Su et al.

Mathieu and Zajac (1990) there is little or no variance in employees perceptions of organizational characteristics such as culture if employees are sampled from a single or a limited number of settings. Therefore, this study seeks to overcome the limitations of prior studies by examining the association between cultural factors and the level of EOC in the Australian manufacturing industry using a large sample size (500 organizations). OReilly et al.s (1991) Organizational Culture Prole (OCP) instrument is used as the measure of organizational culture in the present study. This measure consists of 26 items and has been used extensively (Sheridan 1992; Windsor and Ashkanasy 1996; McKinnon et al. 2003; Baird, Harrison and Reeve 2004, 2007) with similar ndings in regard to the dimensions of culture: team work; respect for people; outcome orientation; innovation; stability; and attention to detail. Team work refers to the extent to which employees within a rm cooperate with each other and work in unison towards overall organizational goals. The importance of teams has been emphasized in the modern economy as they can increase employees exibility and productivity which are both essential components for organizational success (Cohen and Bailey 1997; Bishop, Scott and Burroughs 2000). Gil, Alcover and Peiro (2005) suggested that teams empower greater responsibility to team members thereby increasing their involvement and commitment to work. A positive association between team work and the level of EOC was found by both Becker (1992) and Hayes (1997) and hence, the level of EOC is expected to be higher in organizations where team work is more prevalent. Respect for people refers to the extent to which business units focus on fairness, respect for the rights of the individual, and tolerance (Windsor and Ashkanasy 1996). Being respected by the organization can increase employees commitment to their organization (Tyler 1999). Specically, employees who are treated with genuine respect and fairness are more likely to behave with loyalty and hard work. McKinnon et al. (2003) found a positive association between respect for people and the level of EOC in a Taiwan organization. It is expected that a similar result will be found in Australia as the importance of value and respect is universal (Bond 1991). Outcome orientation refers to the extent to which business units emphasize action and results, have high expectations for performance, and are competitive (OReilly et al. 1991, p. 505). Nystrom (1993) argued that employees feel more committed in organizations that focus on pragmatic values where results are more important than processes. Hofstede (1998) also suggested that employees in organizations with a process-oriented culture perceive themselves as risk-averse and only exert the minimum amount of effort on their work, while in outcome oriented organizations, employees perceive that everyday can bring new challenges and exert maximum effort into their work. McKinnon et al. (2003) treated the link between outcome orientation and the level of EOC as an empirical question with the results demonstrating a positive relationship. Similar ndings are expected in the current study. Innovation represents a business units receptivity and adaptability to change, and its willingness to experiment (OReilly et al. 1991, p. 505). Innovative organizations are more likely to experiment with new practices and their employees are more likely to respond positively to new techniques (Baird et al. 2004, 2007). Drucker (1998) argues that innovation requires focused and hard work everyday rather than just genius, and therefore employees in innovative organizations will exhibit higher levels of EOC. A strong positive relationship between the culture dimension innovation and the level of EOC was found in McKinnon et al. (2003) and similar results are expected in this study.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2499

Stability refers to security of employment (Windsor and Ashkanasy 1996). It represents the extent to which an organization provides stable employment for employees (Windsor and Ashkanasy 1996) and employees perceptions that the employment will continue as long as they exert the appropriate effort in their job (Valletta 1999). In terms of Armknecht and Earlys (1972) study, employees attitudes to job security are contingent on the behaviour of the labour market. Morris, Lydka and OCreevy (1993) argue that job security will only exhibit a strong positive relationship with employees commitment to organizations during recessionary economic conditions. Hence, given the study was conducted prior to the global nancial crisis, economic conditions in Australia were stable and job security was not expected to be related to the level of EOC. Attention to detail is dened as a strict compliance with detailed rules and procedures in terms of precision and accuracy (OReilly et al. 1991). The phrase initiation of structure refers to the degree to which managers dene the roles of their subordinates in job-related activities, specify procedures, and assign tasks (Kohli 1989). Hence, organizations with a high degree of initiation of structure are indicative of a culture which emphasizes attention to detail. Agarwal, Decarlo and Vyas (1999) and Lok and Crawford (2001) suggest that there is no direct relationship between initiation of structure and the level of EOC. Similarly, Johnston, Parasuraman, Futrell and Black (1990) found that the extent of specic information given by supervisors has no direct impact on employees commitment to their organization. As a result, attention to detail is not expected to be associated with the level of EOC. The above discussion leads to the development of the following hypothesis: Hypothesis 1: Organizations that value the organizational culture dimensions of team work, respect for people, outcome orientation, and innovation to a greater extent are more likely to exhibit higher levels of EOC.

Organizational factors This section discusses the association between ve organizational factors (organizational size, training, link to rewards, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction) and the level of EOC. Stevens, Beyer and Trice (1978) suggested that larger organizations have increased opportunities for promotions and interpersonal interactions, thereby resulting in more committed employees. Alternatively, Hodson and Sullivan (1985) argued that larger organizations are perceived to be less personable and harder to identify with, thereby resulting in lower levels of EOC. Employees working in smaller organizations feel stronger personal relationships with their employers and co-workers, and are therefore more committed to their organization. Given these inconsistent ndings, the hypothesis examining the association between organizational size and the level of EOC is stated in the null form: Hypothesis 2: The size of the organization does not affect the level of EOC.

Prior literature maintains that training plays a signicant role in enhancing the level of EOC. For instance, Taormina (1999) found that employees who felt they had received good training exhibited a higher level of commitment to their organization. Similarly, Lambooij, Flache, Sanders and Siegers (2007) suggested that employees are more willing to work overtime when they have been provided adequate training. Alternatively,

2500

S. Su et al.

McGunnigle and Jamesons (2000) study in UK hotels found little evidence to support the relationship between training and the level of EOC. Such ndings were consistent with Davies, Taylor and Savery (2001) who found training was linked to improvements in productivity and reduced employee turnover, but was not linked to increased levels of EOC. Furthermore, there is concern that employees who are given signicant levels of training may become more competent and consequently more likely to look for alternative employment (Lermont-Pape 2002). Given these mixed ndings, the hypothesis concerning the relationship between training and the level of EOC is stated in the null form: Hypothesis 3: The level of training does not affect the level of EOC.

Phoenix (2006) argued that the extent of commitment to an employer is determined by employees perceptions of how their performance is linked to their rewards. Employees who are rewarded for their performances are more likely to be motivated to excel and increase their commitment. In terms of path-goal theory, subordinates choose their level of effort to be applied once leaders dene the paths they must trace in order to receive rewards for their performance (House 1996). Therefore, the provision of the mutual benets between performance and rewards can encourage employees extra effort and involvement within their organization. Hence, employees whose rewards are contingent on their performance are more likely to commit to their organization (Densten 2006). The above discussion leads to the development of the following hypothesis: Hypothesis 4: Organizations with stronger links to rewards are more likely to exhibit higher levels of EOC.

Social exchange theory treats commitment as an exchange commodity (Fuller, Barnett, Hester and Relyea 2003) and suggests that employees will be more likely to commit to an organization when they feel that the organization commits to them (Shore and Tetrick 1991; Guzzo, Noonan and Elron 1994; Tsui, Pearce, Porter and Tripoli 1997; Aube, Rousseau and Morin 2007). Eisenberger, Fasolo and Valerie (1990) found that there is a positive relationship between employees perceived organizational support and their affective commitment to the organization. Employees experiencing higher perceived organizational support will exhibit greater effort and will be less likely to leave. This positive relationship was also found in Rhoades, Eisenberger and Armeil (2000). The above discussion leads to the development of the following hypothesis: Hypothesis 5: Organizations that are perceived to provide a higher level of organizational support are more likely to exhibit higher levels of EOC.

Many studies have examined the relationship between job satisfaction and EOC. Bateman and Strasser (1984) found that job satisfaction was an outcome of EOC rather than a predictor. They argued that employees job satisfaction was developed based on their existing level of EOC. This result was supported by Paik, Parboteeah and Shim (2007). Alternatively, Johnston et al. (1990) argued that job satisfaction was a direct determinant of EOC rather than an outcome of organizational commitment. Similar results were found in Koh and Boo (2004), Lok and Crawford (2001), MacKenzie et al. (1998), and Mannheim, Baruch and Tai (1997). Alternatively, Shore, Barksdale and Shore (1995) investigated the link between job satisfaction and the level of EOC, with the results indicating that job satisfaction was not associated with the level of affective or continuous commitment. In addition, Rayton (2006) argued that there is an interdependent correlation between job satisfaction and EOC. Hence, given the mixed ndings regarding the

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2501

relationship between job satisfaction and the level of EOC, the hypothesis is stated in the null form: Hypothesis 6: The level of job satisfaction does not affect the level of EOC.

Method A survey questionnaire was mailed to the managers from a random sample of 500 Australian manufacturing organizations chosen from the Kompass Australia database (2006). The survey was administered using the Dillman Tailored Design Method (2007) which provides guidelines in relation to the design and distribution of the questionnaire and has been shown to improve response rates to mail survey questionnaires. Variable measurement The level of EOC This study applies Cook and Walls (1980) nine-item scale to measure the level of EOC. It has been shown to be a reliable measure of EOC in prior studies (Jaramillo et al. 2005; Karami, Boojke and Sainfort 2005; Varona 1996). The scale consists of three components (organizational identication, organizational involvement, and organizational loyalty) with respondents required to indicate the extent to which they agree with each of the statements using a ve-point scale with anchors of strongly disagree and strongly agree (see Appendix). The level of EOC was measured as the combined score for the nine items (ranging from 9 to 45), with higher (lower) scores representing a greater (lower) level of EOC. Reverse scoring was applied for the three items that were negatively stated. Organizational culture There are two main perspectives in relation to the measurement of organizational culture, the quantitative and qualitative approaches. The quantitative approach maintains that culture can be objectively determined and measured (Goddard 1997) with numerous instruments having been developed to examine organizational culture (including the Culture Gap Survey (Kilmann and Saxton 1983), the Corporate Culture Survey (Glaser 1983), the Organizational Beliefs Questionnaire (Sashkin 1984), the Organizational Culture Inventory (Cooke and Lafferty 1989), and the Organizational Culture Prole (OReilly et al. 1991)). The qualitative approach assesses organizational culture through observation thereby facilitating a more detailed insight into the prevailing culture. The quantitative approach has been criticized by advocates of the qualitative approach who maintain that the measures used fail to represent observed reality and inhibit the depth and breadth of cultural understanding (Martin 2002; Martin, Frost and ONeill 2006; Schein 1996). In addition, Alvesson (2002) argues that this approach prevents the careful and detailed observation warranted to clear up ambiguities concerning organizational culture. However, while the qualitative approach provides a more detailed insight into the prevailing culture, the obtained data does not permit systematic comparisons to be made (Siehl and Martin 1988). Quantitative approaches overcome this problem by requiring respondents to evaluate organizational culture based on the dimensions included in the questionnaire, thereby facilitating the comparison of cultural attributes between organizations and across time (Hofstede, Neuijen, Ohayv and Sanders 1990, p. 313). Hence, given the objective of the study was to determine how

2502

S. Su et al.

differences in culture may affect the level of EOC, a quantitative approach was considered appropriate. Accordingly, organizational culture was measured using the 26 item version of OReilly et al.s (1991) Organizational Culture Prole (OCP) instrument. This instrument was chosen as it has been widely used in many prior studies including Windsor and Ashkanasy (1996), Sheridan (1992), McKinnon et al. (2003) and Baird et al. (2004, 2007). The OCP measure required respondents to indicate the extent to which each item was valued within their organization on a ve-point Likert scale with anchors of not at all and to a great extent. Factor analysis of the 26-item measure was performed with ve cultural dimensions obtained (67.2% of the total variance): team work/respect for people,2 innovation, attention to detail, stability and outcome orientation. Scores for each of these dimensions were calculated as the sum of the cultural value items which loaded on those dimensions (see Appendix), with higher (lower) scores indicating that the cultural dimension was valued to a greater (lesser) extent.

Organizational size Organizational size was measured using the total number of full-time employees in the organization, with part-time employees being treated as fractions of full-time employees.

Training Training was measured by a single-item self-developed question. Specically, respondents were required to indicate the extent to which adequate training was provided by their organization with anchors of not at all and to a great extent. The level of adequate training was scored from 1 to 5, with higher (lower) scores representing a higher (lower) level of adequate training provided by the organization.

Link to rewards Link to rewards was also measured by a single-item self-developed question. Specically, respondents were required to indicate the extent of the link between performance and rewards, with anchors of not at all and to a great extent. The extent of link to rewards was scored from 1 to 5, with higher (lower) scores representing a stronger (weaker) link to rewards.

The level of perceived organizational support Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch and Rhoades (2001) six-item measure was used to measure the level of perceived organizational support (see Appendix). Respondents were required to indicate if their organization takes pride in their work accomplishments, cares about their well-being, values their contribution to the organizations well-being, considers their goals and values, shows concern for them, and is willing to help them when needed. The level of perceived organizational support was measured as the combined score for the six items (ranging from 6 to 30), with higher (lower) scores representing a higher (lower) level of perceived organizational support. Reverse scoring was applied for the negatively stated item.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the independent variables and the dependent variable. Minimum actual Mean Std dev. (theoretical) 27.29 4.66 7 (7) 8 (5) 5 (5) 5 (3) 4 (3) 1 (1) 1 (1) 1 (1) 9 (6) 5 (5) 15 (9) Maximum actual (theoretical) 35 (35) 25 (25) 25 (25) 15 (15) 15 (15) 130000 (innity) 5 (5) 5 (5) 30 (30) 25 (25) 45 (45)

2503

Variables Team work/respect for people Outcome orientation Innovation Stability Attention to detail Size Training Link to rewards Perceived organizational support Job satisfaction EOC

N 226

Cronbachs alpha .90 .86 .82 .77 .79 .91 .80 .82

227 19.99 3.30 226 17.11 3.80 226 11.00 2.08 226 10.97 2.15 225 1245.54 9222.65 226 3.44 0.96 225 3.26 1.03 227 23.37 4.62 227 226 18.64 36.85 3.22 5.87

The level of job satisfaction Wright and Cropanzanos (1998) ve-item measure was applied to measure the level of job satisfaction. This measure consists of ve dimensions with respondents required to indicate their degree of satisfaction with the tasks performed, co-workers, supervision, remuneration and promotional opportunities using a ve-point scale with anchors of strongly disagree and strongly agree. The level of job satisfaction was measured as the combined score for the ve items (ranging from 5 to 25), with higher (lower) scores representing a higher (lower) level of job satisfaction. Table 1 shows the summary statistics for the independent and dependent variables. For the multi-item scales used to measure the level of perceived organizational support, job satisfaction, EOC, and the ve cultural dimensions, the actual range was comparable with the theoretical range, and the Cronbach alpha (1951) coefcients exceeded the .70 threshold considered acceptable for scale reliability (Nunnally 1978, p. 245). Results and discussion The response rate was 45.4% with 227 responses. These comprised 154 (30.8%) from the initial distribution of the questionnaires and 73 (14.6%) from the follow-up mail-out. A test for non-response bias was conducted by comparing the responses of early and late respondents for each of the independent variables and the dependent variable. The results revealed that were no signicant differences between early respondents and late respondents for any of the variables. Hence, there are no problems regarding non-response bias for the data obtained. Factors affecting EOC: cultural and organizational factors The association between the cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC was initially assessed using hierarchical regression. Table 2 presents the results of the hierarchical regression analysis when the block of cultural factors were entered rst and the block of organizational factors were entered second. The results reveal that both cultural and organizational factors are signicant predictors of the level of EOC in Australian manufacturing organizations. Specically, the amount of variation in the level

2504

S. Su et al.

Table 2. Hierarchical regression of cultural factors/organizational factors with the level of EOC (cultural factors entered rst). Block number 1 Independent variables Cultural factors (team work/respect for people, innovation, attention to detail, stability, and outcome orientation) Organizational factors (size, training, link to rewards, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction) 34.24 0.00** 0.62 0.60 218 R2 change 0.48 F change 38.48 Signicance 0.00**

0.15

16.24

0.00**

F-value p-value R2 Adjusted R2 N

**Signicant at the 0.01 level.

of EOC explained by the cultural factors was 0.48 (p 0.00), while organizational factors explained an additional 0.15 (p 0.00) of the variation in the level of EOC. Table 3 shows the results of the hierarchical regression analysis when the block of organizational factors were entered rst and the block of cultural factors were entered second. The results again suggest that both organizational factors and cultural factors are signicant determinants of the level of EOC. Specically, the organizational factors explained 0.58 (p 0.00) of the total variation in the level of EOC, while the cultural factors explained an additional 0.04 (p 0.00) of the total variation in the level of EOC. Comparison of Tables 2 and 3 show that while the effects of both the cultural factors and the organizational factors are statistically signicant, the effect of the organizational factors on the level of EOC is stronger both when entered rst in the hierarchical regression and in terms of the unique contribution when entered second. To explore this relationship further, stepwise regression was performed to identify the specic factors that had the most signicant effect on the level of EOC.
Table 3. Hierarchical regression of cultural factors/organizational factors with the level of EOC (organizational factors entered rst).
Block number 1 Independent variables Organizational factors (size, training, link to rewards, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction) Cultural factors (team work/respect for people, innovation, attention to detail, stability, and outcome orientation) 34.24 0.00** 0.62 0.60 218 R2 change 0.58 F change 59.91 Signicance 0.00** 0.00**

0.04

4.15

F-value p-value R2 Adjusted R2 N

**Signicant at the 0.01 level.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2505

Table 4. Results of stepwise regression analysis of the effect of cultural and organizational factors on the level of EOC. Level of EOC Variables Outcome orientation Stability Size Perceived organizational support Job satisfaction F-value p-value R2 Adjusted R2 N Coefcient 0.126 0.140 20.114 0.434 0.250 70.47 0.00** 0.62 0.61 217 T-statistics 2.571 2.981 22.723 6.668 3.885 Signicance 0.01* 0.00* 0.01* 0.00** 0.00**

*Signicant at the 0.05 level; **Signicant at the 0.01 level.

Table 5. Results of one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing the level of EOC based on age. Level of EOC Age 21 30 31 40 41 50 51 60 60 N 6 38 83 73 26 Mean 29.83 35.71 36.92 37.03 39.46 St. dev 9.13 5.84 5.80 5.60 4.62 F-statistic Signicance

4.01

0.00**

**Signicant at the 0.01 level.

The nal model produced by the stepwise regression (Table 4) reveals that two cultural factors (outcome orientation and stability) and three organizational factors (size, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction) are signicantly related to the level of EOC. The results indicate that smaller organizations and organizations which have higher levels of outcome orientation, stability, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction are more likely to exhibit higher levels of EOC.
Table 6. Results of one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing the level of EOC based on position levels. Level of EOC Position level 1. CEO 2. General manager 3. Product and IT manager 4. Plant and quality manager N
a

Mean 39.35 37.78 33.95 36.42

Std dev. 5.37 4.90 6.87 5.33

F-statistic

Signicance

44 54 44 55

7.35

0.00**

**Signicant at the 0.01 level; a 30 respondents who indicated that their job titles were slightly different from the above categories were excluded from this analysis.

2506

Table 7. Results of stepwise regression analysis of the effect of cultural and organizational factors on the level of EOC. Level 2b Co-efcient T-stat (t-sig.) Co-efcient T-stat (t-sig.) Co-efcient 0.55 3.48 (0.00**) 2 1.36 2 0.01 0.32 0.71 0.83 0.74 3.31 (0.04*) 19.12 0.00** 0.54 0.51 53 2 2.03 (0.04*) 2.07 (0.04*) 22.27 (0.03*) 4.11 (0.00**) 3.21 (0.00**) 37.78 0.00** 0.74 0.72 43 1.68 0.69 2.45 (0.02*) 5.58 (0.00**) 29.19 0.00** 0.63 0.61 54 Level 3c Level 4d T-stat (t-sig.) 2.38 (0.02*)

Level 1a T-stat (t-sig.)

Variables

Co-efcient

1.19

S. Su et al.

Attention to detail Stability Training Size Perceived organizational support Job satisfaction F F sig. R2 Adjusted R2 N

0.68

3.19 (0.00**) 17.57 0.00** 0.68 0.47 41

a b c d *Signicant at the 0.05 level; **Signicant at the 0.01 level; CEO; General managers; Product and IT managers; Plant and quality managers.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2507

These ndings support the importance of organizational culture as an explanatory factor of the level of EOC with two of the ve cultural dimensions (outcome orientation and stability) found to inuence the level of EOC. These results provide partial support for Hypothesis 1. In respect to the organizational factors, it was found that three of the ve factors (organizational size, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction) exhibited a signicant relationship with the level of EOC. These results provide support for Hypothesis 5 (perceived organizational support) and allow for the rejection of the null hypotheses in respect to Hypothesis 2 (organizational size) and Hypothesis 6 (job satisfaction). The fact that training had no effect on the level of EOC provides support for Hypothesis 3 while the insignicant association between link to rewards and the level of EOC indicates that Hypothesis 4 was not supported.

Factors affecting EOC: demographic factors The association between gender, age, education, salary, duration of employment and level of position with the level of EOC was also examined, with the results indicating that only age and position are signicantly related to the level of EOC. Table 5 reveals that the level of EOC differed based on the age of employees with the post hoc tests revealing that those respondents aged between 21 and 30 had signicantly lower EOC than those respondents in any of the other age brackets. However, no signicant differences in the level of EOC indicated by respondents in any of the other four age brackets were detected, and given that only six responding employees were in the 21 30 age bracket no further analysis of this situation was conducted. Table 6 reveals that the comparison of the level of EOC based on position level was signicantly different with post hoc tests revealing that product and IT managers (level 3) recorded a signicantly lower level of EOC than all of the other managers. Given these ndings subsequent data analysis was conducted to examine the association between the cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC for each of the four levels of manager with the results of the stepwise regression analysis provided in Table 7. Table 7 reveals that all four models were signicant with high R2 values recorded (0.54 0.74). Stability and job satisfaction were found to be positively associated with the level of EOC of employees at the top of the hierarchical chain (CEOs). At the general managers level, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction were positively related to the level of EOC while organizational size was negatively related to the level of EOC. Both perceived organizational support and job satisfaction were also positively related to the level of EOC for product and IT managers (level 3), while training was found to be negatively related to the level of EOC for these managers. Finally, in respect to plant and quality managers (level 4), perceived organizational support, training and attention to detail were all positively related to the level of EOC. Conclusion This study had three objectives, each aimed towards assisting practitioners in identifying the contextual factors that could contribute to the enhancement of the EOC of their employees. The rst objective was to conduct an analysis of the association between organizational cultural factors and the level of EOC in the Australian manufacturing industry. We nd that two cultural factors (outcome orientation and stability) were identied as signicant determinants of the level of EOC. These ndings support previous literature (Nystrom 1993) advocating an association between organizational culture and

2508

S. Su et al.

EOC and suggest that practitioners need to be aware of the prevailing culture within their organization and its impact on EOC. The positive association between outcome orientation and the level of EOC is in line with the expectations of Hofstede (1998) and Nystrom (1993) and reinforces the ndings of McKinnon et al. (2003). A clear outcome orientation can improve employee motivation and commitment to their organization by reducing uncertainty and clarifying what they should achieve (Samson and Daft 2005). Hence, the ndings suggest that employees are more committed to organizations that focus on results as opposed to processes. Managers should therefore emphasize action, achievement, and results, and have high expectations for performance and competitiveness. The nding of a signicant relationship between stability and the level of EOC was not expected and suggests that employees in Australian manufacturing organizations now regard job stability to be crucial. This nding while surprising may reect the increasingly competitive and changing work environments in which new employer employee contracts are based on the concept of employability rather than lifetime employment (Hall and Moss 1998). Job insecurity can cause employees to feel more stressed and thereby lower their commitment and enthusiasm to their organization (Samson and Daft 2005). To address this situation, managers need to provide stable continuous employment to retain valued employees and promote their commitment to their organization. The second objective was to examine the effect of organizational factors on the level of EOC. The results show a signicant relationship between three of the organizational factors (organizational size, perceived organizational support and job satisfaction) and the level of EOC. First, it was found that employees in smaller organizations exhibited higher levels of EOC. This nding is consistent with Hodson and Sullivans (1985) argument that employees will be more committed in smaller organizations as they are more personable and it is easier to maintain positive relationships. Employees in smaller organizations are more likely to develop stronger personal relationships with their employer and co-workers and consequently exhibit a higher level of EOC. To address this situation, managers in larger organizations will need to concentrate on implementing mechanisms which reduce the level of estrangement of employees with their organization. Consistent with previous studies (Eisenberger et al. 1990; Rhoades et al. 2000), the level of EOC was found to be higher among employees who indicated that their organization provided higher levels of perceived organizational support. Therefore, it is of pragmatic benet to managers to demonstrate their concerns and support for employees. Specically, managers should care about employees well-being and value their contribution to the organizations success. Managers also need to consider their employees goals and values, provide assistance when required, and recognize employees accomplishments at work. The results reveal that the level of EOC was higher for employees who reported higher levels of job satisfaction. This result supports the ndings of many studies (Johnston et al. 1990; Mannheim et al. 1997; MacKenzie et al. 1998; Lok and Crawford 2001; Koh and Boo 2004). This association is plausible, as employees with higher job satisfaction are more willing to do extra work and they often work long hours because of their high degree of job satisfaction (Byrne 1998). Accordingly, managers need to ensure that employees have positive attitudes towards their job. Specically, tasks given to employees should match their abilities and interests and the remuneration provided should be consistent with their contribution to their organization. Managers should pay attention to

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2509

employees relationship with their co-workers and supervisors, and ensure that appropriate promotional opportunities are provided. These ndings extend the literature examining the association between organizational factors and the level of EOC and highlight their importance to those practitioners who are intent on enhancing the level of EOC. In addition, given the mixed ndings obtained in previous studies, the ndings in respect to size and job satisfaction provide a further insight into the nature of their association with EOC. The third objective was to examine the association between specic demographic factors with the level of EOC. The results indicate that age and position were the only two factors signicantly associated with the level of EOC. Further analysis was undertaken to identify the specic cultural and organizational factors which affected the EOC of managers across the four different position levels with several interesting ndings. The results revealed that stability was signicantly associated with the level of EOC for top managers (CEOs). Samson and Daft (2005) indicated that the achievement of strategic success needs more than 5 and even up to 10 years consistent strategic direction and policy. Accordingly, the results clearly suggest that organizations need to acknowledge that outcomes from strategic decisions will take time and provide CEOs with job stability if they wish to enhance their EOC. Perceived organizational support was found to have a positive signicant effect on the level of EOC for general, product, IT, plant and quality managers. Organizations today face increasingly tough global competition, uncertain environments, and massive worldwide economic, political and social change (Samson and Daft 2005). Hence, lower level managers are suffering more work stress from task demands3 and role demands4 (Samson and Daft 2005). In this work environment, perceived organizational support becomes extremely important. Specically, lower level managers will be more willing to commit to their organization if they feel that their organization understands their work environment and provides them with assistance in fullling their responsibilities. Organizational size was negatively related to the level of EOC for general managers indicating that the level of EOC of these managers is higher in smaller organizations. This nding suggests that CEOs in larger organizations need to concentrate on developing more personal relationships with these managers in an attempt to improve their EOC. Further, the results indicate that training was negatively associated with the level of EOC for product and IT managers (level 3) while positively associated with the level of EOC for plant and quality managers (level 4). As managers in the lowest level in the organizational hierarchy, plant and quality managers are more directly responsible for the production of goods and the provision of services. Therefore, such managers require more technical skills that can be improved by training. Providing necessary training can enable them to succeed on the job and thereby promote their commitment to their organization (Samson and Daft 2005). However, while managers at lower levels may be stimulated by training programmes, managers at higher levels have less interest and enthusiasm towards training. Hence, the ndings suggest that training provided to higher level managers (CEOs and general managers) has no impact on their level of EOC. This result is also in line with the comments of McMurray et al. (2004) which suggested that training should be implemented at the lower organizational levels rather than at higher management levels. An association between attention to detail and the level of EOC for managers at the lowest level of the hierarchy (plant and quality managers) was identied. Given that these managers are normally under the supervision of managers from more than one position level, role ambiguity becomes a major problem for them, especially when the instructions

2510

S. Su et al.

from different managers are inconsistent. Hence, the provision of sufcient information about role expectations and minimization of potential confusion about performance requirements is important in reducing role ambiguity and will have a positive impact on the level of EOC for these managers (Johnston et al. 1990). This is consistent with Rayton (2006) suggesting that clear job expectations enhance EOC. Finally, job satisfaction was related to the level of EOC across all position levels except level 4 (plant and quality managers).5 Job satisfaction refers to a positive attitude towards ones job and greater job satisfaction can lead to greater EOC (Johnston et al. 1990; Mannheim et al. 1997; MacKenzie et al. 1998; Lok and Crawford 2001; Koh and Boo 2004). Therefore, in order to enhance employees level of EOC, managers should create a work environment where employees can work with a positive emotional state. These ndings have important implications for both practitioners and researchers. The ndings highlight the fact that in attempting to enhance EOC, organizations need to be aware of the usefulness of specic organizational and cultural attributes in enhancing the EOC of specic employees within their organization. Similarly, researchers need be aware of the complexities involved in enhancing EOC with future studies considering EOC in respect to different employee positions. The study has provided an important insight into the cultural and organizational factors which can inuence the level of employee organizational commitment. Importantly the ndings reveal the association of these factors with the level of employee organizational commitment for specic types of managers. Hence, the ndings will assist organizations by providing them with an insight into the factors that can enable them to create an organizational environment conducive to enhancing the EOC of their managers. Such ndings are crucial given improved EOC can lead to better employee performance, decreased employee absenteeism and turnover rates and result in subsequent improvements in productivity and growth. Limitations and suggestions for future research The study is subject to the usual limitations associated with the use of the survey method. For instance, due to the inability to eliminate rival explanations, surveys can only nd associations rather than causal relationships between independent variables and dependent variables (Singleton and Straits 2005). Future studies could combine other methods such as interviews with surveys to get a deeper insight into the factors that affect the level of EOC. In addition, given the self-report survey approach used in the current study, there is a potential threat of measurement error as respondents may answer questions in the direction of social desirability rather than their real feelings (Singleton and Straits 2005). However, given that relatively full ranges were obtained for the variables for which data were gathered suggests that social desirability bias is not a problem. Another potential problem relates to the fact that the measures of training and link to rewards were self-developed and both consisted of a single item. Future studies could test the validity and reliability of these measures, or develop more detailed measures to examine the association between training and link to rewards with the level of EOC. Future studies could also explore the association between organizational culture and EOC in greater detail by adopting a qualitative approach to measure organizational culture. In addition, the survey questionnaires were only distributed to four levels of managers in the organizations hierarchy. Consequently, the data provided may only represent managers perspective of the associations between cultural and organizational factors with

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2511

the level of EOC. Future studies could improve the generalizability of the results by collecting data from front-line employees. Finally, given the current study only investigated the association between cultural and organizational factors with the level of EOC in the Australian manufacturing industry, future studies could make a comparison of the factors that affect the level of EOC across other industries, or between the manufacturing industry in Australia and manufacturing industries in other countries.

Notes
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Position level was operationalized using four levels of management: chief executive ofcers; general managers; product and information technology (IT) managers; and plant and quality managers. Items relating to the team work and respect for people dimensions loaded onto the same dimension and were therefore treated as one combined dimension in the subsequent analysis. Task demands are stressors arising from the tasks such as time pressure and incomplete information. Role demands are challenges associated with a role such as role ambiguity and role conict. The lack of association of this relationship for these managers may be attributed to the routine tasks performed by such managers.

References
Agarwal, S., Decarlo, T.E., and Vyas, S.B. (1999), Leadership Behaviour and Organizational Commitment: A Comparative Study of American and Indian Salespersons, Journal of International Business Studies, 30, 4, 727 743. Agarwala, T. (2003), Innovative Human Resource Practices and Organizational Commitment: An Empirical Investigation, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 2, 175 197. Alvesson, M. (2002), Understanding Organizational Culture, London: Sage. Armknecht, P.A., and Early, J.F. (1972), Quits in Manufacturing: A Study of Their Causes, Monthly Labor Review, 95, November, 31 37. Aube, C., Rousseau, V., and Morin, E.M. (2007), Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Commitment, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 5, 479 495. Baird, K.M., Harrison, G.L., and Reeve, R.C. (2004), Adoption of Activity Management Practices: A Note on the Extent of Adoption and the Inuence of Organizational and Cultural Factors, Management Accounting Research, 15, 4, 383 399. Baird, K., Harrison, G., and Reeve, R. (2007), Success of Activity Management Practices: The Inuence of Organizational and Cultural Factors, Accounting and Finance, 47, 4, 47 67. Bateman, T.S., and Strasser, S. (1984), A Longitudinal Analysis of the Antecedents of Organizational Commitment, The Academy of Management Journal, 27, 1, 95 112. Becker, T.E. (1992), Foci and Bases of Commitment: Are They Distinctions worth Making?, Academy of Management Journal, 35, 1, 222 244. Bhatnagar, J. (2007), Predictors of Organizational Commitment in India: Strategic HM Roles, Organizational Learning Capability and Psychological Empowerment, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18, 10, 1782 1811. Bishop, J.W., Scott, K.D., and Burroughs, S.M. (2000), Support, Commitment, and Employee Outcomes in a Team Environment, Journal of Management Development, 26, 6, 1113 1132. Bond, M.H. (1991), Beyond the Chinese Face: Insights from Psychology, Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. Byrne, J.A. (1998), Virtual Management, Business Week, 80 82. Chow, I.H. (1994), Organizational Commitment and Career Development of Chinese Managers in Hong Kong and Taiwan, The International Journal of Career Management, 6, 4, 3 9. Cohen, S.G., and Bailey, D.E. (1997), What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite, Journal of Management, 23, 3, 239 290.

2512

S. Su et al.

Cook, J., and Wall, T. (1980), New Work Attitude Measures of Trust, Organizational Commitment and Personal Need Non-fulllment, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 1, 39 52. Cooke, R.A., and Lafferty, J.C. (1989), Organizational Culture Inventory, Plymouth, MI: Human Synergistics. Cronbach, L.J. (1951), Coefcient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests, Psychometrika, 16, 297 334. Davies, D., Taylor, R., and Savery, L. (2001), The Role of Appraisal, Remuneration and Training in Improving Staff Relations in the Western Australian Accommodation Industry: A Comparative Study, Journal of European Industrial Training, 25, 7, 366 373. Densten, I.L. (2006), Negotiating Extra Effort through Contingent Rewards, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27, 1, 38 49. Dillman, D.A. (2007), Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Drucker, P.F. (1998), The Discipline of Innovation, Harvard Business Review, 76, 6, 149 157. Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P.D., and Rhoades, L. (2001), Reciprocation of Perceived Organizational Support, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1, 42 51. Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P., and Valerie, D.L. (1990), Perceived Organizational Support and Employee Diligence, Commitment, and Innovation, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 1, 51 59. Fuller, J.B., Barnett, T., Hester, K., and Relyea, C. (2003), A Social Identity Perspective on the Relationship Between Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Commitment, Journal of Social Psychology, 143, 6, 789 791. Gellatly, L. (1995), Individual and Group Determinants of Employee Absenteeism: Test of a Causal Model, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 16, 5, 469 485. Gil, F., Alcover, C., and Peiro, J. (2005), Work Team Effectiveness in Organizational Contexts, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20, 3/4, 193 218. Glaser, R. (1983), The Corporate Culture Survey, Bryn Mawr, PA: Organizational Design and Development. Goddard, A. (1997), Organisational Culture and Budgetary Control in a UK Local Government Application, Accounting and Business Research, 27, 2, 111 123. Guzzo, R.A., Noonan, K.A., and Elron, E. (1994), Expatriate Managers and the Psychological Contract, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 4, 617626. Hackett, R.D., Peter, B., and Hausdorf, P.A. (1994), Further Assessments of Meyer and Allens 1991 Three-component Model of Organizational Commitment, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 1, 15 23. Hall, D.T., and Moss, J.E. (1998), The New Protean Career Contract: Helping Organizations and Employees Adapt, Organizational Dynamics, 26, 3, 22 37. Hayes, N. (1997), Successful Team Management, London: International Thomson Business Press. Hodson, R., and Sullivan, T.A. (1985), Totem or Tyrant? Monopoly, Regional, and Local Sector Effects on Work Commitment, Social Forces, 63, 7, 716 731. Hofstede, G. (1998), Attitudes, Values and Organizational Culture: Disentangling the Concepts, Organization Studies, 19, 3, 477 492. Hofstede, G., Neuijen, B., Ohayv, D.D., and Sanders, G. (1990), Measuring Organizational Cultures: A Qualitative and Quantitative Study Across Twenty Cases, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 286 316. House, R.J. (1996), Path-goal Theory of Leadership Lessons, Legacy, and a Reformulated Theory, The Leadership Quarterly, 7, 3, 323 352. Iverson, R.D. (1996), Employee Acceptance of Organizational Change: The Role of Organizational Commitment, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 7, 1, 122149. Iverson, R.D., and Buttigieg, D.M. (1999), Affective, Normative and Continuance Commitment: Can the Right Kind of Commitment be Managed? Journal of Management Studies, 36, 3, 307 333. Jaramillo, F., Mulki, J.P., and Marshall, G.W. (2005), A Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Organizational Commitment and Salesperson Job Performance: 25 Years Research, Journal of Business Research, 58, 6, 705 714. Johnston, M.W., Parasuraman, A., Futrell, C.M., and Black, W.C. (1990), A Longitudinal Assessment of the Impact of Selected Organizational Inuences on Salespeoples

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2513

Organizational Commitment During Early Employment, Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 3, 333 344. Karami, B., Boojke, C., and Sainfort, F. (2005), Job and Organizational Determinants of Nursing Home Employee Commitment, Job Satisfaction and Intention to Turnover, Ergonomics, 48, 10, 1260 1281. Ketchand, A.A., and Strawser, J.R. (1998), The Existence of Multiple Measures of Organizational Commitment and Experience-related Differences in a Public Accounting Setting, Behavioural Research in Accounting, 10, 109 137. Ketchand, A.A., and Strawser, J.R. (2001), Multiple Dimensions of Organizational Commitment: Implications for Future Accounting Research, Behavioural Research in Accounting, 13, 221 251. Kilmann, R.H., and Saxton, M.J. (1983), The Kilmann-Saxton Culture-Gap Survey, Pittsburgh, PA: Organizational Design Consultants. Ko, J., Price, J.L., and Mueller, C.W. (1997), Assessment of Meyer and Allens Three-component Model of Organizational Commitment in South Korea, Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 6, 961 973. Koh, H.C., and Boo, E.H.Y. (2004), Organizational Ethics and Employee Satisfaction and Commitment, Management Decision, 42, 5, 677 693. Kohli, A.K. (1989), Effects of Supervisory Behaviour: The Role of Individual Differences among Salespeople, Journal of Marketing Research, 53, October, 275 290. Kompass Australia (2006), Victoria: Peter Isaacson Publications. Lambooij, M., Flache, A., Sanders, K., and Siegers, J. (2007), Encouraging Employees to Cooperate: The Effects of Sponsored Training and Promotion Practices on Employees Willingness to Work Overtime, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18, 10, 1748 1767. Lau, C., and Woodman, R.C. (1995), Understanding Organizational Change: A Schematic Perspective, Academy of Management Journal, 38, 2, 537 554. Lermont-Pape, H. (2002), Getting the Maximum Return, Rural Telecommunications, May/June 27 30. Lok, P., and Crawford, J. (1999), The Relationship between Commitment and Organizational Culture, Subculture, Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction in Organizational Change and Development, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20, 7, 365 373. Lok, P., and Crawford, J. (2001), Antecedents of Organizational Commitment and the Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16, 8, 594 613. Mack, D.A., Nelson, D.L., and Quick, J.C. (1998), The Stress of Organizational Change: A Dynamic Process Model, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47, 2, 219232. Mackenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, M., and Aheame, M. (1998), Some Possible Antecedents and Consequences of In-role and Extra-role Salesperson Performance, Journal of Marketing, 62, 3, 87 98. Mannheim, B., Baruch, Y., and Tal, J. (1997), Alternative Models for Antecedents and Outcomes of Work Centrality and Job Satisfaction of High-tech Personnel, Human Relations, 50, 12, 1537 1562. Martin, J. (2002), Organizational Culture: Mapping the Terrain, London: Sage. Martin, J., Frost, P.J., and ONeil, O.A. (2006), Organizational Culture: Beyond Struggles for Intellectual Dominance, in The Handbook of Organization Studies (2nd ed.), eds. S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T.B. Lawrence and W.R. Nord, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 725 753. Mathieu, J.E., and Zajac, D.M. (1990), A Review and Meta-analysis of the Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences of Organizational Commitment, Psychological Bulletin, 108, 2, 171 194. McGunnigle, P.J., and Jameson, S.M. (2000), HRM in UK Hotels: A Focus on Commitment, Employee Relations, 22, 4, 403 422. McKinnon, J.L., Harrison, G.L., Chow, C.W., and Wu, A. (2003), Organizational Culture: Association with Commitment, Job Satisfaction, Propensity to Remain, and Information Sharing in Taiwan, International Journal of Business Studies, 11, 1, 25 44. McMurray, J.A., Scott, D.R., and Pace, R.W. (2004), The Relationship between Organizational Commitment and Organizational Climate in Manufacturing, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15, 4, 473 488. Meyer, J.P., and Allen, N.J. (1991), A Three Component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment, Human Resource Management Review, 1, 1, 61 89.

2514

S. Su et al.

Meyer, J.P., and Allen, N.J. (1997), Commitment in the Workplace, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., and Smith, C.A. (1993), Commitment to Organizations and Occupations: Extension and Test of a Three-component Conceptualization, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 4, 538 551. Meyer, J., Becker, T., and Vandenberghe, C. (2004), Employee Commitment and Motivation: A Conceptual Analysis and Integrative Model, Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 6, 991 1007. Meyer, J.P., Paunonen, S.V., Cellatly, I.R., Gofn, R.D., and Jackson, D.N. (1989), Organizational Commitment and Job Performance: Its The Nature of the Commitment that Counts, Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 1, 152 156. Morris, T., Lydka, H., and OCreevy, M.F. (1993), Can Commitment be Managed? A Longitudinal Analysis of Employee Commitment and Human Resource Policies, Human Resource Management Journal, 3, 4, 21 42. Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W., and Steers, R.M. (1982), Employee-organizational Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover, New York: Academic Press. Nikolaou, I., and Vakola, M. (2005), Attitudes towards Organizational Change: What is the Role of Employees Stress and Commitment?, Employee Relations, 27, 2, 160 174. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill. Nystrom, P.C. (1993), Organizational Cultures, Strategies, and Commitments in Health Care Organizations, Health Care Management Review, 18, 1, 43 49. OReilly, C.A. (1989), Corporations, Culture, and Commitment: Motivation and Social Control in Organizations, California Management Review, 31, 4, 9 25. OReilly, C.A., and Chatman, J.A. (1996), Culture as Social Control: Corporations, Cults and Commitment, Research in Organizational Behaviour, 18, 157 200. OReilly, C., Chatman, J., and Caldwell, D.F. (1991), People and Organizational Culture: A Prole Comparison Approach to Assessing Person organization Fit, Academy of Management Journal, 34, 3, 487 516. Paik, Y., Parboteeah, K.P., and Shim, W. (2007), The Relationship between Perceived Compensation, Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction: The Case of Mexican Workers in the Korean Maguiladoras, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18, 10, 1768 1781. Phoenix, T. (2006), Benets Compensation, International Foundation of Employee Benet Plans, 43, 9, 11 14. Pool, S., and Pool, B. (2007), A Management Development Model: Measuring Organizational Commitment and its Impact on Job Satisfaction among Executives in a Learning Organization, Journal of Management Development, 26, 4, 353 369. Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T., and Boulian, P.V. (1974), Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover among Psychiatric Technicians, Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 5, 603 609. Rayton, B.A. (2006), Examining the Interconnection of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment: An Application of the Bivariate Probit Model, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17, 1, 139 154. Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., and Armeil, S. (2000), Affective Commitment to the Organization: The Contribution of Perceived Organizational Support, American Psychological Association, 86, 5, 825 836. Riketta, M. (2002), Attitudinal Organizational Commitment and Job Performance: A Metaanalysis, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 23, 3, 257 266. Samson, D., and Daft, R.L. (2005), Management, Sydney: Thomson. Sashkin, M. (1984), Pillars of Excellence: Organizational Beliefs Questionnaire, Bryn Mawr, PA: Organizational Design and Development. Savery, L.K., and Luks, J.A. (2000), Organizational Change: The Australian Experience, Journal of Management Development, 19, 4, 309 317. Schein, E.H. (1996), Culture: The Missing Concept in Organization Studies, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 2, 229 240. Sheridan, J.E. (1992), Organizational Culture and Employee Retention, Academy of Management Journal, 35, 5, 1036 1056. Shore, L.M., Barksdale, K., and Shore, T.H. (1995), Managerial Perceptions of Employee Commitment to the Organization, Academy of Management Journal, 38, 6, 1593 1615.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

2515

Shore, L.M., and Tetrick, L.E. (1991), A Construct Validity Study of the Survey of Perceived Organizational Support, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 5, 637 643. Siehl, C., and Martin, J. (1988), Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods, in Inside Organizations: Understanding the Human Dimension, eds. M.O. Jones, M.D. Moore and R.C. Snyder, London: Sage, pp. 79 103. Singleton, R.A., and Straits, B.C. (2005), Approaches to Social Research, New York: Oxford University Press. Smeenk, S.G.A., Eisinga, R.N., Teelken, J.C., and Doorewaard, J.A.C.M. (2006), The Effects of HRM Practices and Antecedents on Organizational Commitment among University Employees, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17, 12, 2035 2054. Stallworth, L. (2004), Antecedents and Consequences of Organizational Commitment to Accounting Organizations, Managerial Auditing Journal, 19, 7, 945 955. Stevens, J.M., Beyer, J.M., and Trice, H.M. (1978), Assessing Personal, Role and Organizational Predictors of Managerial Commitment, Academy of Management Journal, 21, 3, 46 56. Taormina, R.J. (1999), Predicting Employee Commitment and Satisfaction: The Relative Effects of Socialization and Demographics, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 10, 6, 1060 1076. Tsui, A.S., Pearce, J.L., Porter, L.W., and Tripoli, A.M. (1997), Alternative Approaches to the Employee organization Relationship: Does Investment in Employees Pay Off?, Academy of Management Journal, 40, 5, 1089 1121. Tyler, T.R. (1999), Why People Cooperate with Organizations: An Identity-based Perspective, Research in Organizational Behaviour, 21, 201 246. Valletta, R. (1999), Declining Job Security, Journal of Labour Economics, 17, 4, S170 S197. Varona, F. (1996), Relationship between Communication Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment in Three Guatemalan Organizations, The Journal of Business Communication, 33, 2, 111 140. Windsor, C.A., and Ashkanasy, N.M. (1996), Auditor Independence Decision Making: The Role of Organizational Culture Perceptions, Behavioural Research in Accounting, 8, supplement, 80 97. Wright, T.A., and Cropanzano, R. (1998), Emotional Exhaustion as a Predictor of Job Performance and Voluntary Turnover, Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 3, 486 493. Yousef, D.A. (2000), Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction as Predictors of Attitudes toward Organizational Change in a Non-Western Setting, Personnel Review, 29, 5, 567 592.

Appendix The level of EOC

Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) I am quite proud to be able to tell people who it is I work for. I sometimes feel like leaving this employment for good. I am not willing to put myself out just to help the organization. Even if my organization was not doing well nancially, I would be reluctant to change to another employer. I feel that I am a part of the organization. In my work I like to feel I am applying some effort not just for myself but for the organization as well. The offer of a small increase in remuneration by another employer would not seriously make me think of changing my job. I would not advise a close friend to join my organization. I am determined to make a contribution for the good of my organization.

Organizational culture
For each item please indicate the extent to which it is valued in your organization.

2516

S. Su et al.
Attention to detail Being careful Paying attention to detail Being precise Stability Security of employment Stability Predictability Outcome orientation Being competitive Being achievement oriented Having high expectation for performance Being results oriented Being action oriented

Team work/respect for people Fairness Respect for the rights of the individual Tolerance Being socially responsible Being people oriented Being team oriented Working in collaboration with others Innovation A willingness to experiment Not being constrained by many rules Being quick to take advantage of opportunities Being innovative Risk taking

The level of perceived organizational support

Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements relating to your current job. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) My organization My organization My organization My organization My organization My organization takes pride in my accomplishments at work. really cares about my well-being. values my contribution to its well-being. strongly considers my goals and values. shows very little concern for me. is willing to help me when I need a special favour.

Copyright of International Journal of Human Resource Management is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.