Download - JOB SATISFACTION AND ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT…shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/12822/10/10_chapter 3.pdf · CHAPTER III JOB SATISFACTION AND ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT:

CHAPTER III

JOB SATISFACTION AND ORGANISATIONALCOMMITMENT: A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Theoretical Framework of Job Satisfaction

Theoretical Framework of Organisational Commitment

CHAPTER III

JOB SATISFACTION AND ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT:

A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Job Satisfaction and Organisational Commitment are two among the

most prominent work attitudes examined in work and organisational literature.

A brief outlook of the theoretical constructs underlying these two variables are

attempted in this chapter.

3.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK OF JOB SATISFACTION

Job Satisfaction probably is the most widely studied variable in

organisational behaviour. When the attitude of an employee towards his or

her job is positive, there exists job satisfaction. Dissatisfaction exists when

the attitude is negative. Job Satisfaction often is a collection of attitudes

about specific factors of the job. Employees can be satisfied with some

elements of the job while simultaneously dissatisfied with others.

Job Satisfaction is defined as “the extent to which people like

(satisfaction) or dislike (dissatisfaction) their jobs” (Spector, 1997). This

definition suggests that job satisfaction is a general or global affective reaction

that individual hold about their job.

Schaffer (1957) was of the opinion that job satisfaction is primarily

based upon the satisfaction of needs. The stronger the need, the more

closely will job satisfaction depend on its gratification.

79Job Satisfaction and Organisational Commitment: A Theoretical Overview

Bullock (1952) views job satisfaction as an attitude which results from a

balancing summation of many specific likes and dislikes experienced in

connection with the job.

Kornhauser (1965) has presented that men in routine production jobs

have an average less satisfactory mental health than those in more skilled

occupations. Furthermore, the more job satisfied workers in each occupation

enjoyed better mental health than the least satisfied.

Sushila and Singhal (1972) defines job satisfaction as the zest an

employee displays in his harmonious relationship on the job as a result of his

adjustment on three dimensions: people, society and work. It has been

argued that job satisfaction is a composite measure which can be obtained by

a meaningful combination of the indices of personal, organisational and

situational factors.

The term job satisfaction refers to the attitudes and feelings people

have about their work. Positive and favourable attitudes towards the job

indicate job satisfaction. Negative and unfavourable attitudes towards the job

indicate job dissatisfaction.

According to Mathur and Mehta (1996), job satisfaction constitutes

emotional response to a person’s job satisfaction. It often depends how well

the job outcomes fulfil expectations of people at work.

Purcell, Hutchinson and Rayton (2003) believe that discretionary

behaviour which helps the firm to be successful is most likely to happen when

employees are well motivated and feel committed to the organisation and


when the job gives them high levels of satisfaction. Their research found that

the key factors affecting job satisfaction were career opportunities, job

influence, team work and job challenge.

Guna and Maimunah (2008) in their study reveals that job satisfaction

is an employee’s level of positive effect towards job or job situation that

enhances quality of work life. They state that a better understanding of job

satisfaction will ensue a sustainable development of IT workforce. The action

of attending work regularly, working hard and intending to stay in the

organisation for long period of time shows the positive behaviour which

indicates job satisfaction. In contrast, negative behavioural outcomes reveal

dissatisfaction in job.

Altaf (2010) states that job satisfaction is a complex and multifaceted

concept, which can mean different things to different people. The link

between job satisfaction and performance may prove to be a spurious

relationship, instead, both satisfaction and performance are the result of

personality. Hence the behavioural aspect of human resource management

has to be kept in mind by the organisational decision-makers.

Thus, job satisfaction can be surmised as the favourableness or

unfavourableness with which employees view their work. Job satisfaction

results when job characteristics and wants of employees are in agreement. It

relates to inner feelings of the workers regarding his job.

Job satisfaction describes how content an individual is with his/her job.

The happier people are within their job, the more satisfied they said to be.


Job satisfaction is a very important attribute which is frequently measured by

organisations. Job satisfaction has been defined as a pleasurable emotional

state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job; an affective reaction to one’s

job; an attitude towards one’s job. Weiss (2002) has argued that job

satisfaction is an attitude but points out that researchers should clearly

distinguish the objects of cognitive evaluation which affect beliefs and

behaviours. This definition suggests that we form attitudes towards our jobs

by taking into account our feelings, our beliefs and our behaviours.

Since work is one of our major activities, psychologists have had a long

standing interest in job satisfaction. How employees feel about their job is

highly variable. Some employees derive great pleasure and meaning from

their job, while others regards work as drudgery. This is because individual

difference in expectations and in particular, the degree to which a job meets

one’s expectation (Muchinsky, 1999).

History

One of the biggest preludes to the study of job satisfaction was the

Hawthrone studies. These studies (1924-1933), primarily credited to Elton

Mayo of the Harvard Business School, sought to find the effect of various

conditions (most notably illumination) on workers’ productivity. These studies

ultimately showed that novel changes in work conditions temporarily increase

productivity (called the Hawthrone Effect). This finding provided strong

evidence that people work for purpose other than pay, which paved the way

for researchers to investigate other factors in job satisfaction.


Scientific Management (also known as Taylorism) also had a

significant impact on the study of job satisfaction. Frederick Winslow Taylor’s

1911 book, Principles of Scientific Management, argued that there was a

single best way to perform any given work task. This book contributed to a

change in industrial production philosophies, causing a shift from skilled

labour and piecework towards the more modern approach of assembly lines

and hourly wages. The initial use of scientific management by industries

greatly increased productivity because workers were forced to work at a faster

pace. However, workers became exhausted and dissatisfied, thus leaving

researchers with new questions to answer regard job satisfaction. It should

also be noted that the work of Bryan, Walter Dill Scott and Hugo Munsterberg

set the tone for Taylor’s works.

Some argue that Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory, a motivation

theory, laid the foundation for job satisfaction theory. This theory explains that

people seeks to satisfy five specific needs in life – psychological needs, safety

needs, social needs, self-esteem needs and self-actualisation. This model

served as a good basis from which early researchers could develop job

satisfaction theories.

Job satisfaction can also be seen within the boarder context of the

range of issues which affect an individual’s experience of work, or their quality

of working life. Job satisfaction can be understood in terms of its relationships

with other key factors such as general well-being, stress at work, control at

work, home-work-interface and working conditions.


Nature of Job Satisfaction

It is a nebulous concept. Vroom has defined it as the ‘positive

orientation of an individual towards the work role which he is presently

occupying. It can be paraphrased as “an individual liking more aspects of his

work than he dislikes. The four measures of job satisfaction are:

i) Pride in work group

ii) Intrinsic job satisfaction

iii) Company involvement

iv) Financial and job status satisfaction

Following are the major factors that influence job satisfaction:

Factors Results Reduces Leads

1) Proper technology

2) Proper environment

3) Proper individual

behaviour

4) Proper wages

5) Proper schedules

High internal

work motivation

High quality of

work

performance

Tardiness,

turnover stress,

absenteeism,

etc.

High job

satisfaction

Source: Kaila (2011)


Consequences of Job Satisfaction

High job satisfaction may lead to improved productivity, increased

turnover, improved attendance, reduced accidents, less job stress and lower

unionisation (Aswathappa, 2008).

Productivity and Job Satisfaction

The relationship between satisfaction and productivity is not definitely

established. However in the long run, job satisfaction leads to increased

productivity. But there are some conditions under which high productivity

more clearly leads to job satisfaction. One condition is that the employees

perceive that intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are contingent upon their

productivity. The second condition is that the extrinsic rewards (e.g. pay) be

distributed equitably. Inequitable distribution fails to convince the employee

about the close correlation between hard work and rewards. However, the

adage ‘a happy worker is a productive worker’ is not always wrong. Brayfield

and Crockett (1955) undermine the notion that there is a high relationship

between job satisfaction and high productivity.

Job satisfaction and Employee Turnover

High employee turnover is of considerable concern for employers

because it disrupts normal operation, causes morale problems for those who

stick on and increases the cost involved in selecting and training

replacements. The employer does whatever possible to minimise turnover,

making the employees feel satisfied on their jobs, being one such. It has

been demonstrated that workers who have relatively low levels of job


satisfaction are the most likely to quit their jobs and that organisational units

with the lowest average. Satisfaction levels tend to have the highest turnover

rates.

Satisfaction and Absences

Correlation of satisfaction to absenteeism is also proved conclusively.

Workers who are dissatisfied are more likely to take ‘mental health’ days, i.e.,

days off not due to illness or personal business. Simply stated, absenteeism

is high when satisfaction is low. The degree to which people feel that their

jobs are important has a moderating influence on their absences. Employees

who feel that their work is important tend to clock in regular attendance.

Besides, it is important to remember that while job satisfaction will not

necessarily result in low absenteeism, low satisfaction is likely to bring about

high absenteeism.

Satisfaction and Safety

Poor safety practices are negative consequence of low satisfaction

level. When people are discouraged about their jobs, company and

supervisors, they are more liable to experience accidents. An underlying

reason for such accidents is that discouragement may take one’s attention

away from the task at hand. Inattention leads directly to accidents.

Satisfaction and Job Stress

Job Stress is the body’s response to any job-related factor that

threatens to disturb the person’s equilibrium. In the process of experiencing

stress, the employee’s inner state changes. Prolonged stress can cause the


employee serious ailments such as heart disease, ulcer, blurred vision, lower

back pain, dermatitis and muscle aches.

Chronic job dissatisfaction is a powerful source of job stress. The

employee may see no satisfactory short-term solution to escaping this type of

stress. An employee trapped in a dissatisfying job may withdraw by such

means as high absenteeism and tardiness; or the employee may quit.

UnionisationIt is proved that job dissatisfaction is a major cause for unionisation.

Dissatisfaction with wages, job security, fringe benefits, chances for promotion

and treatment by supervisors are reasons which make employees join unions.

Another dimension is that job dissatisfaction can have an impact on the

tendency to take action within the union, such as filing grievances to striking.

Other Effects of Job SatisfactionIn addition to the above, it has been claimed that satisfied employees

tend to have better mental and physical health and learn new job related tasks

more quickly.

All things considered, practising managers and organisational

behaviour researchers would agree that job satisfaction is important to an

organisation. On the other hand, when job satisfaction is low, there tends to

be negative effects on the organisation. So, if only from the standpoint of

viewing job satisfaction as a minimum requirement or point of departure, it is

of value to the organisation’s overall health and effectiveness and is deserving

of study and application in the field of organisational behaviour.


Theories of Job SatisfactionThe theoretical domain of job satisfaction is affluent with the numerous

theories propounded regarding the dynamics of satisfaction in work

environment.

Dispositional Theory

Dispositional Theory is a very general theory that suggests that people

have innate dispositions that cause them to have tendencies toward a certain

level of satisfaction, regardless of one’s job. This approach became a notable

explanation of job satisfaction in the light of evidence that job satisfaction

tends to be stable over time and across career and jobs. Research also

indicates that identical twins have similar levels of job satisfaction.

A significant model that narrowed the scope of the Dispositional Theory

was the Core Self-Evaluation Model proposed by Timothy A. Judge in 1998.

Judge argued that there are four core self-evaluations that determine one’s

dispositions towards job satisfaction: self-esteem, self-efficacy, locus of

control and neuroticism. This model states that higher levels of self-esteem

(the value one places on his/her self) and general self-efficacy (the belief in

one’s own competence) lead to higher work satisfaction. Having an internal

locus of control (believing one has control over her/his own life, as opposed to

outside forces having control) leads to higher job satisfaction. Finally, lower

levels of neuroticism lead to higher job satisfaction.


Job Characteristics Model

Hackman and Oldham proposed the Job Characteristics Model, which

is widely used as a framework to study how a particular characteristics impact

on job outcomes, including job satisfaction. The model states that there are

five core job characteristics (skill variety, task identify, task significance,

autonomy and feedback) which impact three critical psychological states

(experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility for outcomes and

knowledge of the actual results), in turn influencing work outcomes (job

satisfaction, absenteeism, work motivation, etc.). The five core job

characteristics can be combined to form a Motivating Potential Score (MPS)

for a job, which can be used an index of how likely a job is to affect an

employee’s attitudes and behaviours. A meta-analysis of studies that assess

the framework of the model provides some support for the validity of the Job

Characteristics Model.

Job satisfaction is in regard to one’s feelings or state-of-mind regarding

the nature of their work. Job satisfaction can be influenced by a variety of

factors, e.g., the quality of one’s relationship with their supervisor, the quality

of the physical environment in which they work and degree of fulfilment in

their work.

Locke’s Value Theory

The theory posits that job satisfaction is the relationship between job

outcomes realised as compared to those desired. In other words, satisfaction

is high when an employee receives outcomes which he or she values high.


Satisfaction is less when the outcomes received are valued less by the

employee. Locke’s approach focuses on any outcomes that people value,

regardless of what they are and not necessarily lower order needs. The key

to satisfaction, according to the theory, is the discrepancy between those

aspects of the job one has and those one wants: the greater the discrepancy,

lesser the satisfaction.

Locke’s theory calls attention to those aspects of the job that need to

be attended for job satisfaction to result.

Model of Job Satisfaction

Fig. 3.1 shows the causes and consequences of job satisfaction.

Causes for job satisfaction comprise organisational factors, group elements

and individual needs. All these factors contribute to job satisfaction, there are

two variables, namely, outcomes valued/expected and outcomes received.

Fig. 3.1

Causes of Job Satisfaction

OrganisationalFactors

GroupFactors

IndividualFactors

OutcomesExpected/Valued

OutcomesReceived

JobSatisfaction

JobDissatisfaction

LowTurnover

LowAbsenteeism

HighTurnover

HighAbsenteeism


CAUSES OF JOB SATISFACTION

Organisational Factors

There are five major organisational factors which contribute to an

employee’s attitude towards his or her job: pay, opportunities for promotion,

the nature of work, policies of the organisation and working conditions.

Wages: Wages play a significant role in influencing job satisfaction. This is

because of two reasons. First money is an important instrument in fulfilling

one’s needs; and two, employees often see pay as a reflection of

management’s concern for them. When pay system is fair, based on job

demands, individual skill level and community pay standards, satisfaction is

likely to result.

Promotions: Promotional opportunities affect job satisfaction considerably.

The desire for promotion is generally strong among employees as it involves

change in job content, pay, responsibility, independence, status and the like.

It is no surprise that the employee takes promotion as the ultimate

achievement in his career and when it is realised, he feels extremely satisfied.

Nature of Work: Most employees crave intellectual challenges on job. They

tend to prefer being given opportunities to use their skills and abilities and

being offered a variety of tasks, freedom and feedback on how well they are

doing. These characteristics make jobs mentally challenging.

Organisational Policies and Procedures: Organisational policies include

the basis for effecting promotions (seniority versus merit), transfer of people,


foreign assignments, lay-off and retrenchments, appraisal and reward system,

motivational methods, skill based versus job based pay and the like.

Working Conditions: Working conditions that are compatible with an

employee’s physical comfort and that facilitate doing a good job contribute to

job satisfaction, Temperature, humidity, ventilation, lighting and noise, hours

of work, cleanliness of the workplace and adequate tools and equipment are

the features which affect job satisfaction.

The assumption that working conditions and satisfaction are

interrelated contradicts the two-factor theory of motivation. According to this

theory, working conditions are a part of maintenance factors which, when

provided, help remove dissatisfaction.

Thus, while working conditions constitute a source of job satisfaction,

they are a relatively minor source. Generally, unless working conditions are

either extremely good or bad, they are taken for granted by most employees.

Only when employees themselves change jobs or when working conditions

change dramatically over time (e.g. moving new facilities) do working

conditions assume more relevance.

Group Factors

Group factors wielding influence on satisfaction include group size and

supervision.

Size: It is truism to say that longer the size of the group, lower the level of

satisfaction. As size increases opportunities for participation and social

interaction decrease, so also the ability of members to identify with the


group’s performance. More members mean dissension and conflict within

groups. All these do not augur well for satisfaction of members.

Supervision: Perceived quality of supervision is another determinant of job

satisfaction. Satisfaction tends to be high when people believe that their

supervisors are more competent, have their best interests in mind, and treat

them with dignity and respect. Communication is another aspect of

supervision. Satisfaction of members tends to be high when they are able to

communicate easily with their supervisor.

Individual Factors

In addition to organisational and group factors, there are certain

personal variables that have a bearing on job satisfaction.

First, several personality variables have been linked to job satisfaction.

Among these are self-esteem and ability to withstand job stress. Stronger an

individual is on these traits, more satisfied he or she tends to be on his or her

job.

Second, status tends to influence on one’s job satisfaction. Generally

speaking, the higher one’s position in an organisational hierarchy, the more

satisfied the individual tends to be. A dissatisfied employee may not stay at

one place to reach higher position in organisational hierarchy.

Third, job satisfaction is related to the extent to which people perform

jobs congruent with their interests.


Finally, job satisfaction has been found to be related to one’s general

life satisfaction. Here more the people are satisfied with aspects of their lives

unrelated to their jobs, the more they also tend to be satisfied with their jobs.

Hackman and Oldham (1975) maintains that job satisfaction is

associated with five core dimensions: – skill variety, task identify, task

significance, autonomy and feedback from the job itself – as well as two

supplementary dimensions – feedback from agents and dealing with others.

Maslow’s Need Hierarchy Theory

Maslow’s (1954) need hierarchy divides human needs into five levels,

each level represents a group presents. The five levels are physiological

needs, safety needs, social needs self-esteem needs and self-actualisation

needs.

Psychological Needs

The most basic, powerful and obvious of all human needs is the need

for physical survival. The needs included in this group are need for food,

drink oxygen, sleep, protection from extreme temperature and sensory

stimulation. These physiological drives are directly concerned with the

biological maintenance of the organism and motivated by higher order needs.

Physiological needs are crucial to the understanding of human behaviour.

They dominate human desires.

In the organisational context, physiological needs are represented by

employees concern for salary and basic working conditions. It is the duty of


the managers to ensure that these needs of the employees are met so that

they can be motivated to strive for gratification of higher order needs.

Safety Needs

The primary motivating force here is to ensure a reasonable degree of

continuity, order structure and predictability in one’s environment. Safety

needs exert influence beyond childhood. The preference for secured income,

the acquisition of insurance and owning one’s own house may be regarded as

motivated in part by safety seeking. Security needs in the organisational

context correlate to such factors as job security, salary increase, safe working

conditions, unionisation and lobbying for protective legislation.

Social Needs

These needs arise when physiological and safety needs are satisfied.

An individual motivated on this level longs for affectionate relationship with

others, namely for a place in his or her family and or reference groups.

Maslow believed that love involves a healthy, loving relationship between two

people, which include mutual respect, admiration and trust. In the

organisational context, social needs represent the need for a compatible work

group, peer acceptance, professional relationship and friendly supervision.

Self-Esteem Needs

Maslow classified these needs into two subsidiary sets: self-respect

and esteem from others. The former includes such things as desire for

competence, confidence, personal strength, adequacy, achievement,

independence and freedom. Esteem from others include prestige,


recognition, acceptance, attention, status, reputation and appreciation. In the

workplace, self-esteem needs correspond to job title, merit pay increase,

peer/supervisory recognition, challenging work, responsibility and publicity in

company publications.

Self Actualisation Needs

Maslow characterised self-actualisation as the desire to become

everything that one is capable of becoming. The person who has achieved

this highest level presses towards the full use and exploitation of his talents,

capacities and potentialities. In an organisation, self-actualisation needs

correlate to desire for excelling oneself in one’s job, advancing an important

idea, successfully managing a unit and the like.

Maslow’s theory represents a significant departure from economic

theories of motivation.

Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory

Herzberg (1959) proposed that there are two distinct aspects of the

motivation-hygiene theory. The first and more basic part of model represents

a formally stated theory of work behaviour. The second aspect of Herzberg’s

work has focused upon the behavioural consequences of job enrichment and

job satisfaction programmes.


Achievement

Recognition of achievement

Work itself

Responsibility

Advancement

Growth

Company policy and administration

Supervision

Interpersonal relations

Working conditions

Salary*

Status

Security

Fig. 3.2

Herzberg’s Hygienes and Motivators

Hygiene: Job Dissatisfaction Motivators: Job Satisfaction

*Because of its ubiquitous nature, salary commonly shows up as a motivatoras well as hygiene. Although primarily a hygiene factor, it also takes on someof the properties of a motivator, with dynamics similar to those of recognitionfor achievement.


Intrinsic factors such as achievement, recognition, the work itself,

responsibility, advancement and growth seem to be related to job satisfaction.

These factors are variously known as motivators, satisfiers and job content

factors. One the other hand, when they were dissatisfied, they tended to

extrinsic factors such as company policies and administration, supervision,

work conditions, salary, status, security and interpersonal relationships.

These factors are also known as dissatisfiers, hygiene factors, maintenance

factors or job content factors. Satisfaction is affected by motivators and

dissatisfaction by hygiene factors. This is the key idea of Herzberg and it has

important implications for managers.

ERG Theory

Proposed by Calyton Alderfer (1972). According to him, there are

three primary categories of human needs. These categories are:

(b) Existence: The basic physiological needs (hunger and thirst) and

protection from physical danger.

(b) Relatedness: Social and affiliation needs and the need for respect and

positive regards from others.

(c) Growth: The need to develop and realise one’s potential.

Equity Theory

According to Adams (1965), when employees work for an organisation,

they basically exchange their services for pay and other benefits. This theory

is based on the assumption that individuals are motivated by their desire to be

equitably treated in their work relationship. The equity theory proposes that


individuals attempt to reduce any inequity they may feel as a result of this

exchange relationship. The theory proposes that the motivation to act

develops after the person compares inputs, outcomes with the identical ratio

of the relevant other. The important inputs include skill and knowledge,

experience, effort, loyalty, etc. Outcomes include pay, recognition, job level,

social relationship, intrinsic rewards, etc. Satisfaction becomes a ratio of

output to input.

Porter and Lawler’s Expectancy Model

Porter in this model identifies the source of people’s valence and

expectancies and link effort with performance and job satisfaction. This

theory assumes that employee should exhibit more effort when they believe

that they will receive valued rewards for task accomplishment. The

relationship between effort and performance is moderated by an employee’s

abilities and traits and role perceptions. That is, employees with higher

abilities attain higher performance for a given level of effort than employees

with lesser abilities. Performance begets intrinsic and extrinsic rewards to

employees. Intrinsic rewards are intangible outcomes such as achievements.

Extrinsic rewards are tangible outcomes such as pay and recognition. Now,

job satisfaction is determined by employee’s perceptions of the equity of the

rewards received.


Measuring Job Satisfaction

There are many methods for measuring job satisfaction. By far the

most common method for collecting data regarding job satisfaction is the

Likert Scale (named as Rensis Likert). Other less common methods for

gauging job satisfaction include: Yes/No questions, True/False questions,

point system, checklist and forced choice answers. This data is typically

collected using an Enterprise Feedback Management (EFM) system.

The Job Descriptive Index (JDI) created by Smith, Kendall and Hulin

(1969) is a specific questionnaire of job satisfaction that has been widely

used. It measures one’s satisfaction in five facets: pay, promotion and

promotion opportunities, co-workers, supervision and the work itself. The

scale is simple. Participants answer either ‘Yes, ‘No’ or ‘Cannot decide’ in

response to whether given statements accurately describe one’s job.

The Job in General Index is an overall measurement of job satisfaction.

It is an improvement to the JDI because the JDI focuses too much on

individual facets and not enough on work satisfaction in general.

Other job satisfaction questionnaires include.

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ)

In Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, individuals rate the degree to

which they are satisfied with various aspects of their jobs like their degree of

responsibility, opportunities for advancement, pay, etc. The range of ratings

is from ‘not at all satisfied’ to ‘extremely satisfied’. The higher ratings indicate

greater satisfaction, with various aspects of job.


Pay Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ)

The focus is on specific facts of job satisfaction. Individual’s reaction to

pay raises, pay structure, administration and benefits are measured by this

scale.

Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS)

The JSS is a 36 item questionnaire that measures nine factors of job

satisfaction.

Faces Scale

The Faces Scale of job satisfaction, one of the first scales used widely,

measures job satisfaction with just one item which participants respond to by

choosing a face.

3.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK OF ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT

The concept of Organisational Commitment plays an important part in

human resource management philosophy. The concept of Organisational

Commitment is concerned with the degree to which people are involved with

their organisations and are interested in remaining within them.

Organisational Commitment is important to researchers and organisations

because of the desire to retain a strong workforce.

As defined by Mowday, Steers ad Porter (1982), commitment consists

of three components: identification with the goals and value of the

organisation, desire to be long to the organisation and a willingness to display

effort on behalf of the organisation.


The most thoroughly investigated approach to organisational

commitment is the perspective advanced by Mowday and his colleagues

which emphasises the employees’ affective bond with the organisation.

In other words, this is an attitude about employees to their organisation

and is an ongoing process through which organisational participants express

their concern for the organisation and its continued success and well-being.

According to Salanick (1977), “Commitment is state of being in which

an individual becomes bound by his actions to beliefs that sustain his

activities and his own involvement.” Three features of behaviour are

important in binding individual to their acts: the visibility of the acts, the extent

to which the outcomes are irrevocable, and the degree to which the person

undertakes the action voluntarily.

Guest (1987) has suggested that HRM policies are designed to

maximise organisational integration, employee commitment, flexibility and

quality of work. Organisational commitment is the relative strength of the

individual’s identification with, and involvement in, a particular organisation.

Pierce and Dunham (1987) state that as with job involvement, the

research evidence demonstrates negative relationship between organisational

commitment and both absenteeism and turnover.

Mowday (1974) believes that organisational commitment is probably a

better predictor because it is a more global and enduring response to the

organisation as a whole than is job satisfaction. An employee may be


dissatisfied with his or her particular job and consider it a temporary condition,

yet not be dissatisfied with the organisation as a whole.

Sheldon (1971) suggests that organisational commitment is an attitude

or orientation toward the organisation which links or attaches the identity of

the person to the organisation. Robins (1974) also defines organisational

commitment as an individual’s orientation towards the organisation in terms of

loyalty, identification and involvement.

Allen and Meyer (1990) proposed three component model of

organisational commitment, viz., emotional belongingness to their

organisation (Affective Commitment), the cost associated with living the

organisation (Continuance Commitment) and the feeling of obligation to

remain with the employer (Normative Commitment).

In recent times, with employees switching over jobs so frequently and

with such as ease at every possible opportunity for gaining personal benefits,

a major question that the recruitment personnel in various organisations face

at the recruitment process is whether the employee being recruited will benefit

to the organisation in the long run and will he remain with the organisation for

a longer period of time than what the current trend shows. Another problem,

which is a common dilemma for the HR managers, is to hold back the

potential employees in the organisation and preventing them from leaving it.

To succeed in this, what ideally should be done is to not just offer these

employees high material incentives but also try and create a sense of


commitment to the organisation so that the employee remains and works with

the organisation by choice and not force and identifies with the organisation.

Principles of Organisational Commitment

The sense of organisational commitment will prevail an employee if the

following principles are already present in the employee’s nature and

behaviour or if the organisation successfully generates these principle

qualities in them. It is on the presence and absence of these principle

feelings; a certain level of organisational commitment is developed and

maintained.

Job Security

The ability to keep a job for as long as one wants, providing one’s job

performance is satisfactory.

Loyalty

The feelings of affection and attachment to one’s organisations.

Trust in Management

The extent to which employees ascribe good intentions to, and have

trust in, the works and actions of management and their organisation.

Identification

The extent to which employees adopt, as they are own, the goals and

values of the organisation.

Alienation

The extent to which the employees feel disappointed with their career

and professional development.


Helplessness

The extent to which employees feel that they possess few opportunities

and alternatives available to them outside their organisation.

Factors Affecting Commitment

Kochan and Dyer (1993) have indicated that the factors affecting the

level of commitment are what they call mutual commitment. They are:

Strategic Level

- supportive business strategies

- to management value commitment

- effective voice of HR in strategy making and governance

Function (human resource policy) Level

- staffing based on employment stabilisation

- investment in training and development

- contingent compensation that reinforces cooperation

- participation and contribution.

Workplace Level

- selection based on high standards

- broad task design and teamwork

- employee involvement in problem solving

- climate of cooperation and trust.

The research carried out by Purcell et al. (2003) established that the

key policy and practice factors influencing levels of commitment were:

received training last year;


are satisfied with career opportunities;

are satisfied with the performance appraisal system;

think managers are good in people management (leadership);

find their work challenging;

think their form helps them achieve a work-life balance;

are satisfied with communication or company performance.

Multiplicity of the Meanings of Organisational Commitment

The review of the meanings of organisational commitment shows that

different authors stress different aspects of organisational commitment.

Sociologists in particular use organisational commitment to mean certain

behavioural aspects like continuing membership, willingness to exert oneself,

acceptance of and compliance with norms and values, etc. Psychologists, on

the other hand, consider organisational commitment as an attitude, a feeling

of ‘oneness’ with or an attachment to the organisation, positive evaluation,

psychological pre-occupation considering the organisation central to one life, etc.

Porter (1974) have defined organisational commitment as the relative

strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular

organisation. They suggest these definitions for operational purpose and

state that organisational commitment can generally be characterised by at

least three factors.

(a) A strong belief in and acceptance of the organisation’s goals and

values;


(b) A willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the

organisation;

(c) A strong desire to maintain organisational membership.

These three characteristics are clearly implied in the meanings of

identification, performance and permanence respectively.

Buchanan (1974) has viewed organisational commitment as a partisan,

affective achievement to the goals and values of an organisation, to one’s role

in relation to goals and values, and to the organisation for its own sake, apart

from its purely instrumental worth. According to him, organisational

commitment consists of three components:

(1) Identification – adoption as one’s own the goals and values of the

organisation;

(2) Involvement – psychological immersion absorption in the activities of

one’s work role and

(3) Loyalty – a feeling of affection for and attachment to the organisation.

Dimensions of Organisational Commitment

There is some disagreement with regard to the dimensionality of

organisational commitment and these differences stem from different motives

and strategies involved in their development. These include attempts to

account for (a) empirical findings (Angle & Perry, 1981); (b) distinguish among

unidimensional conceptualisation (Jaros, 1993; Allen & Meyer, 1990),

(c) ground commitment with an established theoretical construct (O’Reilly &

Chatman, 1986;) or some combination of these (Mayer & Scoorman, 1992;


O’Reilly, Chatman and Caldwell, 1986). However, a major factor that

distinguishes the different forms of commitment from another within the

various models is the mindset (emotional attachment, sense of being locked

in, belief in and acceptance of the goals) presumed to characterise the

commitment. Moreover, there is considerable similarity in the nature of the

mindsets within the different frameworks.

Dimensions of Organisational Commitment within Multidimensional

Models

Angle & Perry (1981)Value Commitment Commitment to support the goals of the

organisationCommitment to stay Commitment to retain their organisational

membershipO’Reilly & Chatman (1986)Compliance Instrumental involvement for specific extrinsic

rewards.Identification Attachment based on the desire for affiliation with

the organisation.Internalisation Involvement predicted on congruence between

individual and organisational values.Allen & Meyer (1990)Affective The employee’s emotional attachment to

identification with an involvement in theorganisation.

Continuance An awareness of the costs associated with leavingthe organisation.

Normative A feeling of obligation to continue employmentMayer & Schoorman (1992)Value A belief in and acceptance of organisational goals

and values and a willingness to exert considerableeffort on behalf of the organisation.

Continuance The desire to remain a member of theorganisation.


Jaros (1993)Affective The degree to which an individual is

psychologically attached to an employingorganisation through feelings such as loyalty,affection, warmth, belongingness, fondness,pleasure and so on.

Continuance The degree to which an individual experiences asense of being locked in a place of high costs ofleaving.

Moral The degree to which an individual ispsychologically attached to an employingorganisation through internalisation of its goals,values and missions.

Varieties of Organisational Commitment

Affective Commitment

It is the strength of people’s desire to continue working for an

organisation because they agree with its underlying goals and values. People

feeling high degrees of affective commitment desires to remain in their

organisations because they endorse what the organisation stands for and are

willing to help in its mission.

Bauer (2007) posit that organisational conditions encourage

commitment. Participation in decision making and job security are two such

conditions. Certain job characteristics also positively affect commitment.

These include autonomy, responsibility, role clarity and interesting work.

Managers should encourage affective commitment because committed

individuals expend more task related effort and are less likely than others to

leave the organisation (Somers, 1995). Stinglhamber (2003) is of the view

that that managers can increase affective commitment by communicating that


value employees’ contributions and that they care about employees’ well-

being.

Eisenberger (2000) suggests that affective commitment increases

when the organisation and employees share the same values, and when the

organisation emphasises values like moral integrity, fairness, creativity and

openness. Snape (2003) believes that negative experiences at work can

undoubtedly diminish affective commitment. One such experience is

discrimination. Perceived age discrimination, whether for being too old or too

young, can dampen affective commitment.

Luthans (1985) revealed that American workers displayed higher

affective commitment than Korean and Japanese workers. Wong (2003)

showed that Chinese place high value on social relationship at work and that

those with stronger interpersonal relationships are more committed to their

organisation. The author suggests that Chinese firms improve employee

commitment and retention by organising activities to help cultivate relationship

among employees. This means that expatriate managers should be sensitive

to the quality of relationship among their Chinese employees if they want to

improve organisational commitment.

Continuance Commitment

It is strength of a person’s desire to remain working for an organisation

due to his or her belief that it may be costly to leave. The longer the people

remain in their organisation, the more they stand to lose what they have

invested in the organisation over the years.


Becker (1960) view continuance commitment as an employee’s

tendency to remain in an organisation because he or she cannot afford to

leave. Sometimes employees believe that if they leave, they will lose a great

deal of their interest in time, effort and benefits and they cannot replace these

investments.

In Kanter’s (1968) opinion, continuance commitment refers to

participating in a system and remains as its member, which emanates from a

cognitive judgement that it is worthwhile to remain in the group rather than

bear the cost of leaving the group.

Stebbins (1970) has stated that continuance commitment is a

psychological state that arises not from the presence of rewards but from the

presence or imminence of subjectively defined penalties associated with the

attempt or desire to leave a specific position.

Normative Commitment

It refers to employee’s feelings of obligation to stay with their

organisations because of pressure from others. People who have high

degrees of normative commitment are greatly concerned about what others

would think of them for leaving.

Meyer (1993) defined normative commitment as a perceived obligation

to remain with the organisation. Individuals who experience normative

commitment stay with the organisation because they feel that they should.


Benkhoff (1996) posits that affective commitment and normative

commitment are related to lower rates of absenteeism, higher quality of work,

increased productivity and several different types of performance.

Normative commitment refers to an employee’s desire to stay with the

organisation based on a sense of duty, loyalty and obligation. This sense of

loyalty makes individuals feel that they ought to stay committed to the

relationship simply because it is the right thing to do (Allen, 1990).

Common to these approaches is a link between the employees and the

organisation. But the nature of the link differs. Employees with strong

affective commitment remain because they want to, those with strong

continuance commitment remain because they want to, those with strong

normative commitment remain because they ought to do so.

The definitions given by various researchers view organisational

commitment as an attitudinal phenomenon and as the loyalty that the

employees show towards the organisation to attain the goals and vision of the

company and to remain in the organisation.


References

Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In B.M. Staw & G.R.

Salanick, New directions in organisational behaviour. Chicago: St.

Clair Press.

Alderfer, C,P. (1972). Existence, relatedness and growth. New York: Free

Press.

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

affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organisation.

Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.

Angle H.L., & Perry, J.L. (1981). An empirical assessment of organizational

commitment and organizational effectiveness. Administrative ScienceQuarterly, 26 (1), 1-14.

Aswathappa, K., & Sudrasana, Reddy, G. (2008). Management andorganisational behaviour (1st edn.). New Delhi: Himalaya Publishing

House.

Bauer, T.N., Border, T., Erdogan. B., Truxillo, D.M., & Tucker, J.S. (2007).

Newcomer adjustment during organisational socialisation: A meta-

analytic review of antecedents, outcomes and methods. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 92 (3), 707-721.

Becker, H.S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 66, 32-40.

Benkhoff, B. (1997). Ignoring commitment is costly: New approaches

establish the missing link between commitment and performance.

Human Relations, 50, 701- 726.

Brayfield, A., & Crockett, W. (1955). Employee attitudes ad employee

performance. Psychological Bulletin, 396-424.


Buchanan, B. (1974). Building organisational commitment: The socialisation

of managers in work organisations. Administrative ScienceQuarterly, 19, 533-546.

Bullock, R.P. (1952). Social factors related to job satisfaction. ResearchMonograph, No.70, Ohio State University, Bureau of Business

Research.

Eisenberger, R. (2000). Reciprocation of perceived organisational support.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 42-51.

Guest, D.E. (1987). HRM and industrial relations. Journal of ManagementStudies, 14 (5), 503-521.

Guna, S., & Rethinam, M.I. (2008). Constructs of quality of work life: A

perspective of information and technology professionals. EuropeanJournal of Social Science, 7 (1).

Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of job diagnostic

survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman (1959). The motivation to work.

New York: Wiley.

Jaros, S.J., Jermier, J.M., Kehler, J.W., & Sincich, H. (1993). Effects of

continuance, affective, and moral commitment on the withdrawal

process: An evaluation of eight structural equation model. Academy ofManagement Journal, 36 (5), 957-995.

Kaila, H.L. (2007). Organisational behaviour and HRM (2nd edn.). New

Delhi: AITBS Publishers.

Kanter, R.M. (1968). Commitment and social organisation: A study of

commitment mechanisms in Utopian communities. AmericanSociological Review, 33 (4), 499-517.


Kochan, T.A., & Dyer, L. (1993). Managing transformational change: The role

of human resource professionals. International Journal of HumanResource Management, 4 (3), 569-590.

Kornhauser, A. (1965). Mental health of the industrial worker: A Detroitstudy. New York: Wiley.

Locke, E.A. (1984). Effect of self-efficacy, goals ad strategies on task

performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69 (2), 241-251.

Luthans, F. (1998). Organisational behaviour (8th edn.). Boston: Irwin,

McGraw Hill.

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.

Mathur, P., & Mehta, A. (1996). Job involvement in relation with job

satisfaction and motivational climate. Udyog Pragathi, XIX (3), 64-69.

Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., & Smith, C.A. (1993). Commitment to organisations

and occupation: Extension and test of a three-component

conceptualisation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (4), 538-551.

Michael, Armstrong (2008). HRM practice (10th edn.). HRM practice.

London. Kogan Page Limited Publications.

Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M., & Porter, L.W. (1982). The measurement of

organisational commitment. Journal of Applied PsychologicalAssociation, 74, 152-156.

Muchinsky, P.M. (1999). Psychology applied to work (6th edn.).

Wadsworth: Thomas Learning.

Mustafa, A. (2011). Organisational behaviour (1st edn.). New Delhi: AITBS

Publishers.


O’Reilly, C., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organiational commitment and

psychological attachment: The effects of compliance: Identification and

internalisation on prosocial behaviour. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 71, 492-499.

Pierce, J.L., & Dunham, R.B. (1987). Organisational commitment: pre-

employment propensity and initial work experiences. Journal ofManagement, 163-178.

Porter, L.W., & Lawler, E.E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance.

Homewood, Illinois: Irwin-Dorsey.

Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T., & Boulian, P.V. (1974).

Organisational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover among

psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 603-609.

Purcell, J., Hutchinson & Rayton, B. (2003). People and performance: Howpeople management impacts on organisational performance.

London: CIPD.

Salanick, G.R. (1977). Commitment and the control of organisational

behaviour and belief. In B.M. Staw & G.R. Salanick, New directions inorganisational behaviour. Chicago: St. Clair Press.

Schaffer, R.H. (1957). Job satisfaction as related to need satisfaction in work.

Physiological Monographs, 67.

Sheldon, M.E. (1973). Investments and involvements as mechanisms

producing commitment to the organisation. Administrative ScienceQuarterly, 51 (4), 448-454.

Smith, P.C., Kendall, L.L., & Hulin (1969). The measurement of satisfactionin work and retirement. New York: Rand McNally.


Snape, E., & Redman, T. (2003). Too old or too young? The impact of

perceived age discrimination. Human Resource ManagementJournal, 13, 78-89.

Somers, M.J. (1995). Organisational commitment, turnover and absenteeism,

an examination of direct and interaction effects. Journal ofOrganizational Behaviour, 16 (1), 49-58.

Spector, P.E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causesand consequences. California, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Stebbins, R.A. (1970). On misunderstanding the concept of commitment: A

theoretical clarification. Social Forces, 48 (4), 526-529.

Stinglhamber, F., & Vandenberghe, C. (2003). Organisations and supervisors

as sources of support and targets of commitment. Journal ofOrganisational Behaviour, 24, 251-270.

Sushila & Singhal (1972). Measurement of job satisfaction on the three

dimensional plane. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 9 (2), 263-

279.

Weiss, H.M., & Cropanzano, R. (2002). Affective events theory: A theoretical

discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective

experience at work. Research in Organisational Behaviour, 8 (1), 74.

William, B. Werther, & Keith, Davis (1996). Human resource and personnelmanagement (5th edn.). New Jersey: McGraw-Hill Publications.

Wong, C., & Wong, L. (2003). The role of perceived quality of social

relationships within organisations in Chinese societies. InternationalJournal of Management, 20, 216-223.

Download - JOB SATISFACTION AND ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT…shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/12822/10/10_chapter 3.pdf · CHAPTER III JOB SATISFACTION AND ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT:

Top Related