final project-work locus of control

Table of Contents

Acknowledgement………………………………………...….…………………………………i

Executive Summary…………………………………...…….………………………………….ii

List of Tables……………………………………………….……………………………………iii

List of Abbreviation…………………………………….…………………………………….....iv

CHAPTER 1...................................................................................................................12INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................12

1.1 Background.......................................................................................................121.2 Problem Statement...........................................................................................131.3 Research Objective...........................................................................................131.4 Significance of Study........................................................................................13

CHAPTER 2...................................................................................................................15LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................................................15

2.1 Locus of Control................................................................................................152.2 General Locus of Control and its Dimensions...................................................162.3 Work Locus of Control......................................................................................172.4 Organizational Commitment..............................................................................172.5 Relationship between Work Locus of Control and Organizational Commitment................................................................................................................................192.6 Organizational Identification..............................................................................202.7 Work Locus of Control and Organizational Identification..................................212.8 Organizational Identification and Organizational Commitment.........................222.9 Organizational Identification as a Mediator between Work Locus of Control and Organizational Commitment....................................................................................222.10 Theoretical Framework...................................................................................232.11 Hypothesis......................................................................................................24

CHAPTER 3...................................................................................................................25RESEARCH METHODOLOGY......................................................................................25

3.1 Sampling Process.............................................................................................253.2 Research Design..............................................................................................253.3 Sampling Population.........................................................................................253.4 Sample Size......................................................................................................253.5 Research Instrument.........................................................................................26

3.6 Data Collection Method.....................................................................................263.8 Data Analysis....................................................................................................263.9 Time Horizon.....................................................................................................26

CHAPTER 4...................................................................................................................27DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION..................................................................27

1.1 Descriptive Analysis..........................................................................................271.2 Correlation Analysis..........................................................................................271.3 Linear Regression.............................................................................................32

CHAPTER 5...................................................................................................................42CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION...................................................................42

5.1 Conclusion........................................................................................................425.2 Recommendations............................................................................................435.3 Limitations.........................................................................................................43

REFERENCES...............................................................................................................44APPENDIX-I...................................................................................................................47

Questionnaire..........................................................................................................47

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The main objective of research project is to examine the impact of work locus of control

on organizational commitment in non-government organizations of Pakistan. After

extensive literature review and research it is examined that there is significance positive

relationship between work locus of control and organizational commitment.

In order to measure the impact of work locus of control and organizational commitment,

a sample of 100 employees from different non-government organizations was drawn

through convince sampling technique .Questionnaire was adopted, starting from

strongly disagree to strongly agree.

Data analysis was carried out through SPSS software package. Correlation and linear

and multiple regression analysis were carried out to test the predictive nature of

independent variable i.e. work locus of control and its impact on dependent variable i.e.

organizational commitment and its three types.

The research concluded that the work locus of control indicate positive influence on

organizational commitment and the three types of organizational commitment such as

affective, continuous and normative commitment.

List of Tables

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics.........................................................................................27Table 2 Correlations.......................................................................................................27Table 3 Correlations.......................................................................................................28Table 4 Correlations.......................................................................................................28Table 5 Correlations.......................................................................................................29Table 6 Correlations.......................................................................................................29Table 7 Correlations.......................................................................................................30Table 8 Correlations.......................................................................................................30Table 9 Correlations.......................................................................................................31Table 10 Correlations.....................................................................................................31Table 11 Model Summary..............................................................................................32Table 12 ANOVA............................................................................................................32Table 13 Coefficients (a)................................................................................................32Table 14 Model Summary..............................................................................................33Table 15 ANOVA(b).......................................................................................................33Table 16 Coefficients(a).................................................................................................34Table 17 Model Summary..............................................................................................34Table 18 ANOVA(b).......................................................................................................34Table 19 Coefficients(a).................................................................................................35Table 20 Model Summary..............................................................................................35Table 21 ANOVA(b).......................................................................................................35Table 22 Coefficients(a).................................................................................................36Table 23 Model Summary..............................................................................................36Table 24 ANOVA(b).......................................................................................................37Table 25 Coefficients(a).................................................................................................37Table 26 Model Summary..............................................................................................37Table 27 ANOVA(b).......................................................................................................38Table 28 Coefficients(a).................................................................................................38Table 29 Model Summary..............................................................................................39Table 30 ANOVA(b).......................................................................................................39Table 31 Coefficients(a).................................................................................................39Table 32 Model Summary..............................................................................................40Table 33 ANOVA(b).......................................................................................................40Table 34 Coefficients(a).................................................................................................41

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Worldwide the work and its possible future effects is changing with time and also

organization demands for having best performance and competitive edge which leads to

work on workforce emotional welfare stated by De Witte, 1999.

Rotter in 1966, examined the relationship of locus of control and organizational

commitment but Specter in 1988, developed work locus of control scale and examined

work locus of control with organizational commitment. Specter has done more study on

work locus of control and job satisfaction but his work provides us grounds to consider

that work locus of control will have strong relationship with organizational commitment.

Early studies explained organizational commitment has no dimensions but Meyer and

Allen in 1991 recommended that organizational commitment has three types, Affective,

Continuous and Normative commitment. They developed a scale on it .Affective

commitment refers to an emotional involvement with workplace (person wants to stay

with workplace)Continuous commitment refers to the cost bearing by leaving workplace

as person need to stay as he has not alternates. Normative commitment refers to the

responsibility to continuous work with workplace. These three types of commitment is

important because these types of commitment reduces the chances of leaving a

workplace.

Due to the effect of affective commitment and continuous commitment on the

functions of workplace, anything that can bring improvement in our perception of

variables can be helpful for workplace.

Meyer and Allen also stated that different variables of individuals also contribute

in the growth of affective commitment. Different studies shows that those having internel

wok locus of control mostly have affective commitment with their workplace (Luthans

1987)

The universal control beliefs are measured by work locus of control, stated by

(Honegger & Appelbaum, 1998). In several researches the researchers focused on the

issues that add value in the development of relationship of work locus of control and

organizational commitment. The reason of this study is to examine the correlation

between work locus of control and organizational commitment and with its types,

focusing the employee in nongovernmental organizations in Pakistan. Although many

researchers have done work on the relationship of work locus of control and

organizational commitment but not in Pakistan so there exist some research space and

this study contributes to fill this research space.

This research shows that work locus of control has positive relation with

organizational commitment.(Chang 1990) stated that employees with internal work

locus of control will be more committed to the workplace and if not ,they will try to leave

the workplace but when they stay in workplace they are forced or they needed to stay.

Those having internal work locus of control think that their achievements depends upon

their own deeds (Fairly & Tosi, 1989).

1.2 Problem Statement

What is the impact of work locus of control on organizational commitment and its

types using organizational identification as mediator?

1.3 Research Objective

The main objective of our research project is to know the impact of work locus of

control on organizational commitment and its types using organizational identification as

mediator in Pakistan and to find:

The relationship of work locus of control and organizational commitment.

Importance of work locus of control and organizational commitment.

The effect of implementing work locus of control on organizational

commitment and its types such as affective, continuous, and normative

commitment.

1.4 Significance of Study

The research has following importance:

It will help us to know that either work locus of control help in enhancing

organizational commitment or not.

How work locus of control is related to organizations and how it will affect the

commitment and loyalty of employees in organizations.

It will also help us to know that to which extent work locus of control is related to

the types of organizational commitment in Pakistan.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Locus of Control

Brownell (1981) defined locus of control as an individual’s opinion about the level

of control a person can have over the actions of his or her life. Triandis (1995) described

individualism as a trend for people to examine themselves as separate entities who are

mostly provoked by the objectives and priorities of their own.

Locus of control is defined as an indication of the autonomous identity by Markus

and Kitayama (1998) and a term of requirement for independence by Kagitgibasi

(1994). Phares (1976) stated that thinking about control can be changed across some

fields of life. On the other hand, if someone's interest is related to working issues, it is

obvious to value the workplace control instead of general control.

Core self-evaluations have four dimensions which are neuroticism, self-efficacy,

self-esteem and one is locus of control. Judge Locke and Durham (1997) were the first

who examined the perception of core self-evaluation and it has been proven that people

have the abilities to forecast different work results.

Rotter (1966) defined locus of control as a degree to which people think that they

can control the actions of their lives. He divided locus of control as internal locus of

control and External locus of control. Those people having internal locus of control think

that events of their lives are controlled by their own behaviours and judgements while

the people who have an external locus of control think that they cannot control whatever

happens to them. They think that it is a result of luck or fate.

Rotter (1966) also stated that locus of control can be measured with the

Internal/External (I-E) Scale which presents external locus of control by high scores and

internal locus of control by low scores.

According to Rotter (1966) locus of control is the extent to which people think that

results are driven either by their own deeds or by the outside forces which create a

range with external locus of control at one side and internal locus of control at other

side.

According to Spector (1982), Wickens and Hollands (2000) and Ng, Sorensen

and Eby (2006), those people who have internal locus of control frequently think that

they can control a tense condition for which they can use different problem solving

tactics while those having external locus of control think that situations are not possible

to be changed or transformed.

All those people who think that whatever happens to them are controlled by the

workplace surroundings are the one who have external locus of control and are more

sensitive to the workplace support. This is stated by Chiu, Lin, Tsai and Hsiao (2005).

2.2 General Locus of Control and its Dimensions

Chen, Gorddard and Casper (2004), Lefcourt (1976), Phares (1976), and Rotter

(1975) stated that locus of control has been defined as a hierarchical construct with high

level of general locus of control present with in this hierarchy.

Locus of control is a broader concept. Levenson (1981) defined general locus of control

as degree to which individuals generally relate the outcomes to their own actions

instead of any outside forces like fate or luck.

There are some dimensions of general locus of control depending upon the

situations like Health locus of control stated by Wallston, Kaplan and Maides (1976),

marital locus of control by Miller et al (1983), and Parental locus of control by Campis et

al (1986). All of them exist at lower level of organizational structure. Spector (1988)

gave the concept of one more dimension called Work locus of control on which the

recent researches are particularly focused.

Locus of control has been noticed for wide studies within some sub dimensions

of psychology such as medical, developmental and societal psychology. These studies

showed that locus of control is connected to different variables like Marital problem

solving stated by Miller, Lefcourt and Ware (1983), Educational achievements by

Crandall and Katkovsky (1965), Longevity by Krause and Shaw (2000) and quality of

Parent-child relationships which is stated by Campis, Lyman and Prentice-Dunn (1986).

A study done by Ng, Sorensen and Eby (2006), gives a current analysis of the study

which shows the importance of locus of control in the organization. This study also

shows that both work locus of control and general locus of control have similar

connection with working criteria. They also stated that the analysis proved that internal

locus of control was directly connected to the degree of common interest and to the

affective responses associated with work.

2.3 Work Locus of Control

Spector (1988) defined work locus of control as the degree or point to which

workers quality rewards at their jobs to their own conduct (for example work locus of

control matters contain “those workers are rewarded who do well at their jobs” and “If

workers make attempts, most of them are competent to do their jobs soundly”

Spector (1988) also assumes or propose that those workers who have an internal locus

of control will act better in the job state of affairs as they have strong faith in their own

capabilities and also in promising prizes. We anticipated that instead of general locus of

control, work locus of control would show high level of interaction with working criteria.

Pretorius & Rothman (2001) explained the Work locus of control as the opinion of

individuals having about the connection between their own performance and the

outcomes of incentive or penalty. Those people who have an internal locus of control

consider that the outcomes of their doings can be controlled by themselves, while those

having an external locus of control suppose that there is an external force by which their

outcomes are controlled.

According to Schmit et al (1995), Hunthausen et al (2003), Bing et al (2004),

Leivens et al (2008), this forecast is becoming more reliable with the mounting literature

on situation effects, which propose that asking/inquiring the people about their

performance at job are more powerfully linked with working criteria instead of general

locus of control.

2.4 Organizational Commitment

In the journalism on business and organizational psychology, the perception of

organizational commitment has developed in fame stated by Cohen, 2003. Studies

done before by Porter, Steers, Mowday and Boulian (1974) on organizational

commitment make a vision of the concept that it has a single measurement or element

which stands on an attitudinal outlook/perception, accepting classification, association

and devotion.

Organizational commitment is termed by Mowday,Steers and Porter (1982) as a

strong relationship of individual identification and attachment in a specific workplace.

Organizational commitment has been broadly recognized by Allen and Meyer (1990)

that it has not only a single measurement but it is multidimensional.

Organizational commitment is described by Meyer and Allen (1991) as a mental

state which distinguishes the correlation of worker with the workplace and has

proposition for the choice to leave or not to leave the workplace. They classified

organizational commitment into three different/diverse parts which are named as

Affective commitment, Continuous commitment and Normative commitment

respectively.

Affective commitment is defined as “the psychological association of workers to the

recognition with and attachment to the workplace. Workers with a positive affective

commitment will not leave the workplace as they feel like doing it.”

Continuous commitment is defined as the knowledge and understanding of expenses

linked with leaving the workplace. Workers with strong continuous commitment stay in

workplace as their most important relation to workplace is based on continuous

commitment and because it’s their requirement.

Normative commitment is defined as the feelings of commitment and responsibilities

to carry on the job. Workers having strong/positive normative commitment believe that

they should stay with the workplace.

Allen and Meyer (1997) stated that organizational commitment can be

deliberated by using Affective, Continuous and Normative commitment scale. According

to Hrebiniak and Alutto (1972), normative perception is defined as the loyalty of a

worker to carry on the job for his or her workplace is on the basis of the concept of

thinking about the benefits of cost of parting from the workplace.

Mathieu and Zajac (1990) and Meyer, Allen, and Smith (1993) stated that organizational

commitment can be described as a connection between the worker and his or her

workplace. Organizational commitment is very important to the workplace because it is

connected to many different and attractive results like work performance, reduce

turnover, lower the purpose to exit, decreases absenteeism (stated by Mathieu and

Zajac in 1990 and Jaros in 1997) but Begley and Czajka (1993) also added one more

outcome to it which is minimizing the stress levels.

Similarly Yousef (2000) explained further the point of Begley that organizational

commitment is directly manipulated by job performance and indirectly controlled by job

stress (stated by Sager, 1990).

2.5 Relationship between Work Locus of Control and Organizational Commitment

First see that Spector (1988) defined work locus of control as a character

inconsistency. He stated that organizational commitment is a comprehensive

anticipation that the result of their work done in life can be restricted by two ways, one

by their own deeds which is called Internal work locus of control and other by outside

forces which means External work locus of control.

The work done which is related to work locus of control and organizational

commitment is very rare. A lesson performed by TColeman, Irving and Cooper (1999)

on the correlation between the work locus of control and organizational commitment

which shows the conclusion that internal work locus of control was correlated to

affective commitment and external work locus of control was correlated to continuous

commitment.

A study is done by Robbins (2001) in large quantity on the evaluation of internal

work locus of control and external work locus of control which constantly revealed that

people who have high level of internal work locus of control are more pleased/contented

with their work and having less absenteeism rate, more attached to their jobs and are

on good terms from the job surroundings than the people having high level of external

work locus of control.

Spector (1988) also assumes that employees will complete their work in a better

way in working conditions because they have strong faith in the capabilities they have

and the outcomes of it.

In three of the studies done by Mowday, Steers and Porter (1979), they stated

the association between work locus of control and organizational commitment. In these

studies they reported that there were small relationships of work locus of control and

organizational commitment while the work locus of control and satisfaction relations was

bigger. This is possibly because Spector considered organizational commitment with

only two things from Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) due to which the

result is not placed/conclude effectively. Yet Spector (1988) concluded from work locus

of control and job satisfaction that it provides us a cause to consider that the work

dimension of locus of control will be positively correlated to organizational commitment.

2.6 Organizational Identification

One the former of using the idiom ‘Organizational Identification’ was Phillip

Tompkins (2005) and is the founder of the research on organizational commitment.

Simon (1947) was also one of those who were praised for launching Organizational

Identification in assumptions and research.

The philosophy of Organizational Identification is broader in general. Cheney and

Tompkins (1987) did studies for many years in organizational identity and identification

which finally made clear the function of these perceptions in the workplace. They further

stated that Organizational Identification is type of organizational control which took

place when a decision maker who belongs to a workplace, wants to select one of the

best option which support the supposed benefits of that workplace.

According to Ashforth and Mael (1989) Organizational Identification is the

observation of feeling of being alone and belongingness to the workplace.

The concept of Organizational Identification is expressed as emotional and motivational

procedures by O’Reilly and Chatman (1986) who quarreled about Organizational

Identification that it occurs from the magnetism and aspiration to retain a psychologically

pleasing connection with the workplace.

The attractiveness of the perception of identity and identification is that they give

us a method to have a look on the human behavior in their workplace structure.

Organizational Identification is the internal concept that means the worker point of view

about the workplace. This concept was stated by Albert, Ashforth and Dutton (2000).

According to Dutton, Duckerich and Herguail (1994) and Hatch and Schultz

(2000), the worker identification with the workplace is based on the Organizational

Identity. And Pratt (1998) stated that the whole concept of Organizational Identification

is connected to one question that is “What is my relation to my workplace?”

The satisfaction and worker behavior can be influenced by Organizational

Identification and the value of workplace is also affected. It is stated by Lee (1971), then

by Hall and Schneider (1972), O’Reilly and Chatman (1986), Ashforth and Mael (1989)

and by Albert et al (2000).

2.7 Work Locus of Control and Organizational Identification

The studies related to work locus of control and organizational identification is

scarce but the small amount of study shows that organizational identification has a

strong/positive relation with work locus of control.

Cheney (1983) and Scott, Corman and Cheney (1998) explained that

organizational identification make an optimistic/positive relation with the work attitudes

and behaviors such as job performance, satisfaction and motivation, worker dealings

and retentions and also decision making.

Cheney (1983) expressed that organizational identification is connected to all

those results or outputs which are in the support of workplace. McGregor (1967) stated

that organizational identification is linked to workers loyalty to common objective of

workplace. And according to Patchen (1970) organizational identification is also linked

to workers relations with one another.

A study was done by Lee (1971) in which he found that all those scientists who

have a positive/strong organizational identification established positive attitudes towards

their work, workplace and career, instead of those scientists having negative relation

with organizational identification.

2.8 Organizational Identification and Organizational Commitment

According to Tompkins (2005), organizational identification is a very significant

field of study as organizational identification and organizational commitment has a

connection between them.

By narrowing the scale of the founder, Knippenberg and Sleebos (2006) have

made an effort to split organizational identification and affective organizational

commitment. They stated that identification is a perceptual construct which shows the

relation of oneself and commitment shows the attitude towards the workplace and its

workers. They further added that identification involves the emotional attachment to the

workplace but commitment means the connection between workplace and worker in

which they are considered separate units.

The level of relationship of organizational identification and affective

organizational commitment was observed by Riketta (2005) by observing 96 separate

samples and he creates an important and a very positive and direct relationship

between organizational identification and affective commitment. According to his study

the correlation is equal to 0.78 which shows that the standard research of organizational

identification had a major level of correlation with affective organizational commitment.

Lee (1971) also stated that high level of organizational identification will create a high

level of organizational commitment. The workers will be more committed if they have a

positive organizational identification.

2.9 Organizational Identification as a Mediator between Work Locus of Control and Organizational Commitment

Organizational identification creates a strong and positive relation as a mediator

between work locus of control and organizational commitment because has a direct

relation with both work locus of control and organizational commitment so it will affect

the relationship of work locus of control and organizational commitment positively.

The little research about the relationship of organizational identification and work locus

of control shows that it has a direct relation. According to Cheney (1983), organizational

identification is connected to the variety of attitudes, behaviors and results that are

related to work and support workplace.

Similarly according to Lee (1971), the worker having strong organizational

identification will have a strong organizational commitment. So as a mediator

organizational identification will strengthen the effect of work locus of control and

organizational commitment.

2.10 Theoretical Framework

2.11 Hypothesis

H1: Work locus of control is positively related to organizational commitment

H2: Work locus of control is positively related to affective commitment

H3: Work locus of control is positively related to continuous commitment

H4: Work locus of control is positively related to normative commitment

H5: Organizational identification strengthen the relationship of work locus of control and

organizational commitment


affective commitment


continuous commitment


normative commitment

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Sampling Process

Sampling is the act, process, or technique of selecting a representative part of a

population for the purpose of determining the characteristics of the whole population

and authenticity of outcome is only possible when there is proper technique

development used for sampling. For our research we have chosen convenient sampling

technique to get ideal results so the number of employees who will participate is not

predetermined employees are given questionnaire and given complete information and

guidance to fill that questionnaire so that the outcome of results are authentic.

3.2 Research Design

This study is conducted in the natural work environment of the organization .variables

are neither controlled nor manipulate.

3.3 Sampling Population

In this study the population of study includes the employees of Engro food and

compulogic in Islamabad.

Sample size is nether too large nor too small we are running test on the employees of

Engro food and compulogic only .sample size was not pre determined that’s why

convenient sampling technique was used.

3.4 Sample Size

Sample size of our research consists of 60 employees from Engro food and 40

employees from compulogic, these organizations are operating in Pakistan.

3.5 Research Instrument

Questionnaire is used to collect data which is filled by the employees of Engro food and

compulogic in Pakistan.

3.6 Data Collection Method

The data is collected through questionnaire, in which there are 39 questions to know the

affect of of work locus control on organizational commitment and on its types which are

Affective,Normative and Continuous commitment and organizational identification using

employee relation/climate as a mediator.

3.7 Measurement Scale

For this study we have used Spector work locus of control scale and Meyer and Allen

scale of organizational commitment.

3.8 Data Analysis

SPSS software is used to run the data in which we used different statistical methods in

order to check the data some of the techniques we used are correlation analysis and

regression analysis to check the impact of work locus control on organizational

commitment and on its types which are Affective, Normative and Continuous

commitment and organizational identification using employee relation/climate as a

mediator.

3.9 Time Horizon

All the employees have given questionnaires and after filling these questionnaires by

the employees we will not be consulted again to them so this study is a cross sectional.

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

1.1 Descriptive Analysis

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. DeviationAge 100 1 4 1.54 .744Gender 100 0 1 .73 .446Education 100 1 4 1.86 .711Income 100 1 6 3.80 1.589Experience 100 1 4 1.96 .909Valid N (listwise) 100

Testing HypothesisOne of the main purposes of research project is to find out the impact of work locus of

control on organizational commitment. The outcomes of hypothesis testing and analysis

are organized under the following headings.

1.2 Correlation Analysis

Correlation of work locus of control and organizational commitment

Table 2 Correlations

WLOCMEAN OCMEANWLOCMEAN Pearson Correlation 1 .607(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

OCMEAN Pearson Correlation .607(**) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The pearson correlation is 0.607 which shows that the two variables work locus of

control and organizational commitment are strongly correlated with each other. This

means that changes in work locus of control are strongly correlated with changes in

organizational commitment.

The sig. (2-tailed) is 0.00 which means there is statistically significant correlation

between both variables and increase or decrease in work locus of control is highly

related to increase or decrease in organizational commitment.

Work locus of control and Affective organizational commitment


WLOCMEAN ACMeanWLOCMEAN Pearson Correlation 1 .387(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

ACMean Pearson Correlation .387(**) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100


The pearson correlation is 0.387 which shows that the variables work locus of control

and affective commitment have weak relationship with each other in comparison to

other types of commitment. The sig. (2-tailed) is 0.00 which means there is statistically

significant correlation between both variables and increase or decrease in work locus of

control is highly related to increase or decrease in affective commitment.

Work locus of control and continuous commitment


WLOCMEAN CCMeanWLOCMEAN Pearson Correlation 1 .587(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

CCMean Pearson Correlation .587(**) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100


The pearson correlation is 0.587 which shows that work locus of control and continuous

organizational commitment are comparatively strongly correlated with each other. This

means that changes in work locus of control are strongly correlated with changes in

continuous commitment.



related to increase or decrease in continuous commitment.

Work locus of control and normative commitment


WLOCMEAN NCMeanWLOCMEAN Pearson Correlation 1 .522(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

NCMean Pearson Correlation .522(**) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100


The pearson correlation is 0.522 which shows that work locus of control and normative

organizational commitment have comparatively less stronger relationship with each

other. This means that changes in work locus of control are strongly correlated with

changes in normative commitment.



related to increase or decrease in normative commitment.

Work locus of control and organizational identification


WLOCMEAN OIMeanWLOCMEAN Pearson Correlation 1 .545(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

OIMean Pearson Correlation .545(**) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100


The pearson correlation is 0.545 which shows that work locus of control and

organizational identification are strongly correlated with each other. This means that

changes in work locus of control are strongly correlated with changes in organizational

identification.



related to increase or decrease in organizational identification.

Organizational identification and organizational commitment


OIMean OCMEANOIMean Pearson Correlation 1 .408(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

OCMEAN Pearson Correlation .408(**) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100


Organizational identification and organizational commitment are positively correlated

with each other as shown in table (pearson correlation is 0.408). The sig. (2-tailed) is

0.00 which means there is statistically significant correlation between both variables and

increase or decrease in organizational identification is highly related to increase or

decrease in organizational commitment.

Organizational identification and affective commitment


OIMean ACMeanOIMean Pearson Correlation 1 .201(*)

Sig. (2-tailed) .044N 100 100

ACMean Pearson Correlation .201(*) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .044N 100 100

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Organizational identification and affective commitment have comparatively weak

relationship than with other types of commitment as shown in table (pearson correlation

is 0.201). The sig. (2-tailed) is 0.044 which means there is statistically significant

correlation between both variables and increase or decrease in organizational

identification is highly related to increase or decrease in affective commitment.

Organizational identification and continuous commitment


OIMean CCMeanOIMean Pearson Correlation 1 .339(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) .001N 100 100

CCMean Pearson Correlation .339(**) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .001N 100 100


Organizational identification and continuous commitment have comparatively stronger

relationship than affective commitment as shown in table (pearson correlation is 0.339).


between both variables and increase or decrease in organizational identification is

highly related to increase or decrease in continuous commitment.

Organizational identification and normative commitment


OIMean NCMeanOIMean Pearson Correlation 1 .487(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

NCMean Pearson Correlation .487(**) 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100


Organizational identification and normative commitment have comparatively stronger

relationship than both affective and continuous commitment as shown in table (pearson

correlation is 0.487). The sig. (2-tailed) is 0.000 which means there is statistically

significant correlation between both variables and increase or decrease in

organizational identification is highly related to increase or decrease in normative

commitment.

1.3 Linear Regression

Work locus of control and organizational commitment

Table 11 Model Summary

Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .607(a) .368 .362 .44469a Predictors: (Constant), WLOCMEAN

This table shows the value of R and R Square, where R represent the simple correlation

and in this case R=0.607 which means that there is positive correlation between work

locus of control and organizational commitment. R Square is 36.2% which represents

the total number of variation in organizational commitment can be explained by work

locus of control and it shows that it is not very large.

Table 12 ANOVA

Model

Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 11.299 1 11.299 57.136 .000(a)

Residual 19.379 98 .198Total 30.678 99

a Predictors: (Constant), WLOCMEANb Dependent Variable: OCMEAN

This table reports how well the regression equation fits the data. In the regression row

Sig. is 0.000 and is less than 0.05 which indicates that this regression model statistically

is a good fit for the data.

Table 13 Coefficients (a)

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients t Sig.

BStd. Error Beta B

Std. Error

1 (Constant) .979 .304 3.221 .002

WLOCMEAN .654 .086 .607 7.559 .000

a Dependent Variable: OCMEAN

This table gives us the information to determine the contribution of independent variable

statistically significantly to the model. Here Beta is equal to 0.607 which shows that

work locus of control positively influence the dependent variable which is organizational

commitment.

Work locus of control and affective commitment


Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square



This table shows the value of R and R Square, where R represent the simple correlation

and in this case R=0.387 which means that there is positive correlation between work

locus of control and affective organizational commitment. R Square is 14.9% which

represents the total number of variation in affective commitment can be explained by

work locus of control and it shows that it is not very large.

Table 15 ANOVA(b)

Model

Sum of Squares Df

Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 6.147 1 6.147 17.215 .000(a)

Residual 34.991 98 .357Total 41.138 99

a Predictors: (Constant), WLOCMEANb Dependent Variable: ACMean




Table 16 Coefficients(a)

Model



BStd. Error Beta B

Std. Error

1 (Constant) 1.411 .408 3.458 .001WLOCMEAN .482 .116 .387 4.149 .000

a Dependent Variable: ACMean

This table gives us the information to determine the contribution of independent variable

statistically significantly to the model. Here Beta is equal to 0.387 which shows that

work locus of control positively influence the dependent variable which is affective

commitment.

Work locus of control and continuous commitment


Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square



In this case R=0.587 which means that there is positive correlation between work locus

of control and continuous organizational commitment. R Square is 34.5% which

represents the total number of variation in continuous commitment can be explained by

work locus of control and it shows that it is not very large.

Table 18 ANOVA(b)

Mod Sum of Df Mean F Sig.

el Squares Square1 Regressi

on 17.875 1 17.875 51.574 .000(a)

Residual 33.966 98 .347Total 51.841 99

a Predictors: (Constant), WLOCMEANb Dependent Variable: CCMean





Model


Standardized Coefficients T Sig.

BStd. Error Beta B

Std. Error

1 (Constant) .370 .402 .920 .360WLOCMEAN .822 .115 .587 7.181 .000

a Dependent Variable: CCMean

Here Beta is equal to 0.587 which shows that work locus of control positively influence

the dependent variable which is continuous commitment.

Work locus of control and normative commitment


Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square



Here R=0.522 which means that there is positive correlation between work locus of

control and normative organizational commitment. R Square is 27.3% which represents

the total number of variation in normative commitment can be explained by work locus

of control and it shows that it is not very large.

Table 21 ANOVA(b)

Model

Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 10.449 1 10.449 36.759 .000(a)

Residual 27.858 98 .284Total 38.307 99

a Predictors: (Constant), WLOCMEANb Dependent Variable: NCMean





Model



BStd. Error Beta B

Std. Error

1 (Constant) 1.256 .364 3.448 .001WLOCMEAN .629 .104 .522 6.063 .000

a Dependent Variable: NCMean

Here Beta is equal to 0.522 which shows that work locus of control positively influence

the dependent variable which is continuous commitment.

Organizational identification as a mediator between Work locus of control and organizational commitment


Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square


1 .614(a) .377 .364 .44396a Predictors: (Constant), OIMean, WLOCMEAN

This table shows the value of R which is equal to 0.614 and it shows that organizational

identification positively affects the correlation between work locus of control and

organizational commitment. R Square is equal to 37.7% which means there is a little

increase in the total number of variation in organizational commitment due to the

mediator organizational identification.

Table 24 ANOVA(b)

Model

Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 11.559 2 5.779 29.322 .000(a)

Residual 19.119 97 .197Total 30.678 99

a Predictors: (Constant), OIMean, WLOCMEANb Dependent Variable: OCMEAN

Here Sig. is 0.000 which shows that this regression model statistically is a good fit for

the data. the effect of mediator is positive.


Model



BStd. Error Beta B

Std. Error

1 (Constant) .826 .331 2.494 .014WLOCMEAN .589 .103 .547 5.722 .000

OIMean .103 .090 .110 1.149 .253a Dependent Variable: OCMEAN

Here Beta is 0.547 for work locus of control and Beta is 0.110 for organizational

identification which means that organizational identification positively influences the

relationship of work locus of control and organizational commitment.

Organizational identification as a mediator between Work locus of control and affective commitment


Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square



This table shows the value of R which is equal to 0.387 and it shows that organizational

identification positively affects the correlation between work locus of control and

affective commitment. R Square is equal to 13.2% which means there is a little

decrease in the total number of variation in affective commitment due to the mediator

organizational identification.

Table 27 ANOVA(b)

Model

Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 6.152 2 3.076 8.528 .000(a)

Residual 34.986 97 .361Total 41.138 99

a Predictors: (Constant), OIMean, WLOCMEANb Dependent Variable: ACMean


the data. The effect of mediator is positive.


Model



BStd. Error Beta B

Std. Error

1 (Constant) 1.432 .448 3.198 .002WLOCMEAN

.491 .139 .394 3.525 .001

OIMean -.014 .122 -.013 -.117 .907a Dependent Variable: ACMean

Here Beta is 0.394 for work locus of control and Beta is -0.013 for organizational

identification which means that organizational identification has very little influence on

the relationship of work locus of control and affective commitment.

Organizational identification as a mediator between Work locus of control and continuous commitment


Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square



The value of R is equal to 0.588 and it shows that organizational identification positively

affects the correlation between work locus of control and continuous commitment. R

Square is equal to 33.2% which means there is a little decrease in the total number of

variation in continuous commitment due to the mediator organizational identification.

Table 30 ANOVA(b)

Model

Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 17.902 2 8.951 25.584 .000(a)

Residual 33.938 97 .350Total 51.841 99

a Predictors: (Constant), OIMean, WLOCMEANb Dependent Variable: CCMean




Model



BStd. Error Beta B

Std. Error

1 (Constant) .320 .441 .727 .469WLOCMEAN .801 .137 .572 5.840 .000

OIMean .034 .120 .027 .281 .780a Dependent Variable: CCMean



relationship of work locus of control and continuous commitment.

Organizational identification as a mediator between Work locus of control and normative commitment


Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square



R is equal to 0.575 which shows that organizational identification positively affects the

correlation between work locus of control and normative commitment. R Square is equal

to 33.1% which means there is an increase in the total number of variation in normative

commitment due to the mediator organizational identification.

Table 33 ANOVA(b)

Model

Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 12.676 2 6.338 23.988 .000(a)

Residual 25.630 97 .264Total 38.307 99

a Predictors: (Constant), OIMean, WLOCMEANb Dependent Variable: NCMean




Model



BStd. Error Beta B

Std. Error

1 (Constant) .809 .383 2.110 .037WLOCMEAN .440 .119 .366 3.690 .000

OIMean .302 .104 .288 2.903 .005a Dependent Variable: NCMean



relationship of work locus of control and normative commitment.

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION

5.1 Conclusion

The above study has been conducted to examine the impact of work locus of control on

organizational commitment and its types which are affective, normative and continuous

commitment in the public organization of the Pakistan. For that survey we choose Engro

food, non-government organizations and Compulogic Company. The result of survey

show different perception regarding work locus of control.

It is obvious from the result and discussion that there is a positive relationship between

work locus of control and organizational commitment. One of the main factor that can

enhance organization performance is work locus of control, by providing employees

favorable climate lead the organization to success because it enhance the commitment

of employees toward their organization.

The findings of the survey shows that work locus of control have different impact on

different dimensions of organizational commitment such as affective, normative and

continuous commitment. Workers with a positive affective commitment will not leave the

workplace as they feel like doing it.” Workers with strong continuous commitment stay in

workplace as their most important relation to workplace is based on continuous

commitment and because it’s their requirement. Workers having strong/positive

normative commitment believe that they should stay with the workplace and work locus

of control has high interaction with working criteria.

5.2 Recommendations

According to our research, following are the recommendations that can be given to all

organizations either public or private in order to motivate the employees to do their work

in a better way which will lead to maximize employee’s outcomes, employee’s

commitment towards the organization.

These recommendations are:

Managers should provide such climate which in return increases the productivity

of the organization.

Manager should give their employees carrier opportunities and rewards which

can motivate them and they become loyal with the organization.

If the manager treat their subordinates with care, trust and motivate them then

they shows greater level of commitment and innovative behavior.

Managers should give the opportunity to their subordinates to participate in

decision making.

Manager should not be very rigid with their employees he should have to be

supportive and trust worthy which will help them to be more motivated and

committed.

Give incentives and benefits to their employees that will also increase their

motivation and commitment to the organization.

5.3 Limitations

Following are the limitation we have face while doing that research:

i. The sample size of 100 is small to examine the impact of work locus of control

and organizational commitment in private organizations.

ii. Limited access to employees of organizations and having limited time for the

research work.

iii. As the result has been drawn on the basis of the information provided by the

respondent therefore there are high chances of errors.

iv. Each respondent may have different perception regarding questionnaire that

ways gap of perception may be occurred.

v. The research is based on selected variables which are mentioned in the

questionnaire any other variable are not taken into the investigation.

REFERENCES1. Locus of control and well-being at work: how generalizable are western findings?

PAUL E. SPECTOR--University of South Florida Academy of Management

Journal 2002, Vol. 45. No. 2, 453-466.

2. Relationship of Organizational Commitment, Locus of Control, and Readiness to

Change among Nurses By Santi Julita and Wan Rafaei Abdul Rahman

3. WORK LOCUS OF CONTROL AND DISPOSITIONAL OPTIMISM AS

ANTECEDENTS TO JOB INSECURITY By J BOSMAN , J H BUITENDACH, SA

Journal of Industrial Psychology, 2005, 31 (4), 17-23 ans SA Tydskrif vir

Bedryfsielkunde, 2005, 31 (4), 17-23

4. 8-1-2011 --Influence of Locus of Control and Job Satisfaction on Organizational

Commitment: A Study of Medical Records Personnel in University Teaching

Hospitals in Nigeria By Bruno I. Igbeneghu and S. O. Popoola

5. 2009--Health locus of control, self-efficacy, and multidisciplinary intervention for

chronic back pain By Nicole Hochhausen Keedy --University of Iowa

6. Journal of Applied Psychology 2010, Vol. 95, No. 4, 761–768---A Meta-Analytic

Examination of Work and General Locus of Control By Qiang Wang, Nathan A.

Bowling, and Kevin J. Eschleman Wright State University

7. Work locus of control as a mediator of the relationship between sources and

consequences of occupational stress among university teachers ANA

SLIŠKOVIĆ, DARJA MASLIĆ SERŠIĆ and IRENA BURIĆ---Review of

Psychology,2011, Vol. 18, No. 2, 109-118

8. Begley, T. M. & Czajka, J. M. (1993). Panel analysis of the moderating effects of

commitment on job satisfaction, intent to quit, and health following organisational

change. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (4), 552-556.

9. Brownell, P. (1981). Participation in budgeting, locus of control and

organizational effectiveness. The Accounting Review, 56, 844 - 860.

10.Chiu, C-K., Lin, C-P., Tsai, Y. H., Hsiao, C-Y. (2005). Modeling turnover

intentions and their antecedents using the locus of control as a moderator: A

case of customer service employees. Human Resource Development Quarterly,

16 (4), 481-99.

11.Judge, T. A., Thoreson, C. J., Pucik, V., & Welboume, T. M. (1999). Managerial

coping with organizational change: A dispositional perspective. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 75, 710-720.

12. Iverson, R. D. (1996). Employee acceptance of organizational change: The role

of organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 7 (1), 122-49.

13.Meyer, J. P. & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory,

research, and application. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, Inc.

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

and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(4), 538-5

15.Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control

of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80 (1), 1-28.51.

16.Spector, P. E. (1988). Development of the work locus of control scale. Journal of

Occupational Psychology, 61, 335-340.

17.Yousef, D. (2000). Organizational commitment and job satisfaction as predictors

of attitudes toward organization change in a non-western setting. Personnel

Review, 29, 5-6, 6-25.

18.Sager, J. K. (1990). How to retain salespeople. Industrial Marketing

Management, 19, 155-66.

19.Albert, Stuart., Blake E. Ashforth., and Janet E. Dutton. (2000). “Organizational

identity and identification: charting new waters and building new bridges.”

Academy of Management Review 25 (1), 13-17.

20.Albert, Stuart., and David A. Whetten. (1985). “Organizational identity.” In Larry

L. Cummings., and Barry M. Staw (eds.), Research in organizational behavior.

An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews, 263-295. Greenwich:

JAI Press.

21.Ashforth, Blake E., and Fred Mael. (1989). “Social identity theory and the

organization.” Academy of Management Review 14 (1), 20-39.

22.The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Organizational Commitment:

Exploring Multiple Mediation Mechanisms Omer Farooq • Marielle Payaud •

Dwight Merunka • Pierre Valette-Florence Received: 2 November 2012 /

Accepted: 14 October 2013

APPENDIX-I

Questionnaire

A Survey on Employee’s Work Locus of Control and its relationship with Organizational Commitment.

Dear Sir/Madam!I am conducting a research survey on Employee’s Work Locus of Control and its relationship with Organizational Commitment In this regard I will be thankful for your cooperation and participation in this survey.

Part APlease tick the appropriate checkbox below.

Age

21-30 41-50 31-40 51 and above

Gender

Male Female

Highest Level of Education

Bachelors MS/M.Phil Masters PhD

Income Level

Below 10,000 31,000-40,000 11,000-20,000 41,000-50,000 21,000-30,000 Above 50,000

Work Experience

Less than year 6-10 yrs. 1-5 yrs. 10 or above

Part BPlease circle the appropriate number against each statement, according to the

scale given below.

ScaleStrongly Disagree

1

Disagree2

Indifferent/Neutral

3

Agree4

Strongly Agree

5

1. A job is what u make of it 1 2 3 4 5

2. On most jobs, people can pretty much accomplish whatever they set out to accomplish 1 2 3 4 5

3. If you know what you want out of a job, you can find a job that gives it to you. 1 2 3 4 5

4. If employees are unhappy with a decision made by their boss, they should do something about it. 1 2 3 4 5

5. Getting the job you want is mostly a matter of luck. 1 2 3 4 5

6. Most people are capable of doing their jobs well, if they put effort in it. 1 2 3 4 5

7. Making money is primarily a matter of good fortune. 1 2 3 4 5

8. In order to get a really good job, you need to have family members or friends in high places 1 2 3 4 5

9. Promotions are usually a matter of good fortune. 1 2 3 4 5

10.To make a lot of money, you need to know the right people. 1 2 3 4 5

11. It takes a lot of luck to be an outstanding employee on most jobs. 1 2 3 4 5

12.People, who perform their jobs well, generally get rewarded. 1 2 3 4 5

13.Most employees have more influence on their supervisors than they think they do. 1 2 3 4 5

14.The main difference between people who make a lot of money and people who make a little money is luck. 1 2 3 4 5

15.My employment in the organization is a big part of who I am. 1 2 3 4 5

16. I consider myself as an organization person. 1 2 3 4 5

17.What the organization stands for is important for me. 1 2 3 4 5

18. I share the values and goals of the organization. 1 2 3 4 5

19.My membership of the organization is important for me. 1 2 3 4 5

20. I feel strong ties with the organization. 1 2 3 4 5

21. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career in this organization. 1 2 3 4 5

22. I really feel as if this organization’s problem are my own. 1 2 3 4 5

23. I don’t feel like ‘part of the family’ in my organization 1 2 3 4 5

24. I don’t feel emotionally attached to this organization. 1 2 3 4 5

25.This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me. 1 2 3 4 5

26. I don’t feel strong sense of belongingness to my organization. 1 2 3 4 5

27. It would be very hard for me to leave this organization, even if I wanted to. 1 2 3 4 5

28.Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my organization. 1 2 3 4 5

29.Right now, staying with my organization is a matter of necessity as much as desire. 1 2 3 4 5

30. I believe, I have too few options to consider leaving this organization. 1 2 3 4 5

31.One of the few negative consequences of leaving this organization would be the scarcity of available alternates.

1 2 3 4 5

32.One of the major reasons, I continue to work for this organization is that leaving would require considerable personal sacrifice: another organization may not match the overall benefits that I have here.

1 2 3 4 5

33. If I had not put already so much of myself into this organization, I might consider working elsewhere. 1 2 3 4 5

34. I don’t feel any obligation to remain with my current employer. 1 2 3 4 5

35.Even if it were to my advantage, I don’t feel it would be right to leave my organization now. 1 2 3 4 5

36. I would feel guilty if I left my organization now. 1 2 3 4 5

37.This organization deserves my loyalty. 1 2 3 4 5

38. I would not leave my organization right now because I have a sense of obligation to the people in it. 1 2 3 4 5

39. I owe a great deal to my organization. 1 2 3 4 5

Thank you.

final project-work locus of control

Documents