10220140502001

International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), ISSN 0976 – 6324 (Print),
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH
ISSN 0976 – 6332 (Online), Volume 5, Issue 2, March- April (2014), pp. 01-09 © IAEME

IN MANAGEMENT (IJARM)

ISSN 0976 - 6324 (Print)
ISSN 0976 - 6332 (Online)
Volume 5, Issue 2, March-April (2014), pp. 01-09
© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijarm.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2014): 1.6232 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com

IJARM
©IAEME

A THEORETICAL STUDY ON THE BASIC CONCEPTS AND
DEVELOPMENTS IN ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
S. Subhashini1,

C.S. RamaniGopal2

Research Scholar1, Prof and Head2
Faculty of Management Studies, Vinayaka Missions University, Salem.

ABSTRACT
In organizational behavior and industrial and organizational psychology,
Organizational commitment is the individual's psychological attachment to the organization.
Organizational commitment predicts work variables such as turnover, organizational
citizenship behavior, and job performance. Some of the factors such as role stress,
empowerment, job insecurity and employability, and distribution of leadership have been
shown to be connected to a worker's sense of organizational commitment. Organizational
commitment can be contrasted with other work-related attitudes, such as job satisfaction,
defined as an employee's feelings about their job, and organizational identification, defined as
the degree to which an employee experiences a sense of oneness' with their organization.
I. INTRODUCTION
Organizational commitment may be defined as the psychological attachment of an
individual to his/her organization and he/she wishes to continue to work with the
organization. Mowday, Steers, and Porter (1979) defined organizational commitment as, “the
relative strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular
organization. That can be characterized by three factors: (i) a strong belief in and acceptance
of the organization’s goals and values, (ii) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf
of the organization, and (iii) a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization.
Organizational commitment has significant implications for organizations. A high level of
commitment among employees toward their organization enhances organizational
effectiveness and helps the organization to achieve its objectives (Meyer & Allen, 1997).
1


Moreover, commitment to the organization has been found related to a variety of
organizational outcomes, such as increased employee performance and job satisfaction,
reduced turnover and withdrawal cognition, lower absenteeism rate, and increased
organizational citizenship behavior (Fornes, Rocco, & Wollard, 2008; Mathieu & Zajac,
1990; Meyer et al., 2002).
II. CONSTRUCTS OF COMMITMENT:
Researchers considered commitment as unidimensional construct (e.g., Becker, 1960;
Mowday et al., 1979; Wiener, 1982), while others viewed commitment as multidimensional
construct (e.g., Meyer & Allen, 1991; O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986; Penley & Gould, 1988).
According to the unidimensional perspective, commitment is defined as a consistent line of
activity that a person engages because of the recognition of costs associated with leaving
(Becker, 1960) or more popularly, it is called an emotional attachment of employee to the
organization (Mowday et al., 1979). On the other hand, the multidimensional approach to
organizational commitment contends that commitment can occur in different forms, such as
compliance, identification, and internalization (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986) or affective,
continuance, and normative commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991).
III. DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
Two major theoretical approaches emerge from previous research on commitment:
Firstly, commitment is viewed as an attitude of attachment to the organization, which leads
to particular job–related behaviors. The committed employee, for example, is less often
absent, and is less likely to leave the organization voluntarily, than are less committed
employees.
Secondly, one line of research in organizations focuses on the implications of certain
types of behaviors on subsequent attitudes. A typical finding is that employees who freely
choose to behave in a certain way, and who find their decision difficult to change, become
committed to the chosen behavior and develop attitudes consistent with their choice.
One approach emphasizes the influence of commitment attitudes on behaviors,
whereas the other emphasizes. Although the ‘commitment attitude behavior’ and ‘committing
behavior attitude’ approaches emerge from different theoretical orientations, and have
generated separate research traditions, understanding the commitment process is facilitated
by viewing these two approaches as, inherently, inter–related.
Rather than viewing the causal arrow, between attitudinal and behavioral
commitment, as pointing in one direction or the other, it is more useful to consider the two as
reciprocally–related over time. It is equally reasonable to assume that (a) commitment
attitudes lead to committing behaviors that subsequently reinforce and strengthen attitudes;
and (b) committing behaviors lead to commitment attitudes and subsequent committing
behaviors.
The important issue is not whether the commitment process begins with either attitude
or behavior. Rather, it is important to recognize the development of commitment may involve
the subtle interplay of attitudes and behaviors over a period of time. The process through with
commitment is developed may involve self–reinforcing cycles of attitudes and behaviors that
evolve on the job, and over time, strengthen employee commitment to the organization.

2


IV. MODELS OF COMMITMENT
Organizational scientists have also developed many nuanced definitions of
organizational commitment, and numerous scales to measure them. Exemplary of this work is
Meyer and Allen's model of commitment, which was developed to integrate numerous
definitions of commitment that had been proliferated in the literature. Meyer and Allen's
model has also been critiqued because the model is not consistent with empirical findings.
Meyer and Allen's (2007) three-component model of commitment was created to
argue that commitment has three different components that correspond with different
psychological states. Meyer and Allen created the model for two reasons: first "aid in the
interpretation of existing research" and second "to serve as a framework for future research.
Meyer and Allen’s research indicated that there are three "mind sets" which can characterize
an employee's commitment to the organization:
Affective Commitment
AC is defined as the employee's positive emotional attachment to the organization.
Meyer and Allen pegged AC as the “desire” component of organizational commitment. An
employee who is affectively committed strongly identifies with the goals of the organization
and desires to remain a part of the organization. This employee commits to the organization
because he/she "wants to". This commitment can be influenced by many different
demographic characteristics: age, tenure, sex, and education but these influences are neither
strong nor consistent. The problem with these characteristics is that while they can be seen,
they cannot be clearly defined. Meyer and Allen gave the example that “positive relationships
between tenure and commitment maybe due to tenure-related differences in job status and
quality” .In developing this concept, Meyer and Allen drew largely on Mowday, Porter, and
Steers's (2006) concept of commitment, which in turn drew on earlier work by Kanter (1968).
Continuance Commitment
Continuance Commitment is the “need” component or the gains verses losses of
working in an organization. “Side bets,” or investments, are the gains and losses that may
occur should an individual stay or leave an organization. An individual may commit to the
organization because he/she perceives a high cost of losing organizational membership (cf.
Becker's 1960 "side bet theory". Things like economic costs (such as pension accruals) and
social costs (friendship ties with co-workers) would be costs of losing organizational
membership. But an individual doesn’t see the positive costs as enough to stay with an
organization they must also take into account the availability of alternatives (such as another
organization), disrupt personal relationships, and other “side bets” that would be incurred
from leaving their organization. The problem with this is that these “side bets” don’t occur at
once but that they “accumulate with age and tenure”.
Normative Commitment
The individual commits to and remains with an organization because of feelings of
obligation, the last component of organizational commitment. These feelings may derive
from a strain on an individual before and after joining an organization. For example, the
organization may have invested resources in training an employee who then feels a 'moral'
obligation to put forth effort on the job and stay with the organization to 'repay the debt.' It
may also reflect an internalized norm, developed before the person joins the organization
through family or other socialization processes, that one should be loyal to one's organization.
3


The employee stays with the organization because he/she "ought to". But generally if an
individual invest a great deal they will receive “advanced rewards.”
V. CRITIQUE TO THE THREE-COMPONENT MODEL
Since the model was made, there has been conceptual critique to what the model is
trying to achieve. Specifically from three psychologists, Omar Solinger, Woody Olffen, and
Robert Roe. To date, the three-component conceptual model has been regarded as the leading
model for organizational commitment because it ties together three aspects of earlier
commitment research (Becker, 2005; Buchanan, 2005; Kanter, 1968; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990;
Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Salancik, 2004; Weiner, 2004; Weiner & Vardi, 2005).
However, a collection of studies have shown that the model is not consistent with empirical
findings. Solinger, Olffen, and Roe use a later model by Alice Eagly and Shelly Chaiken,
Attitude-behavior Model (2004), to present that TCM combines different attitude phenomena.
They have come to the conclusion that TCM is a model is for predicting turnover. In a sense
the model describes why people should stay with the organization whether it is because they
want to, need to, or ought to. The model appears to mix together an attitude toward a target,
that being the organization, with an attitude toward a behavior, which is leaving or staying.
They believe the studies should return to the original understanding of organizational
commitment as an attitude toward the organization and measure it accordingly. Although the
TCM (Three-Component Model) is a good way to predict turnover, the psychologists do not
believe it should be the general model. Because Eagly and Chaiken's model is so general, it
seems that the TCM can be described as a specific subdivision of their model when looking at
a general sense of organizational commitment. It becomes clear that affective commitment
equals an attitude toward a target, while continuance and normative commitment are
representing different concepts referring to anticipated behavioral outcomes, specifically
staying or leaving. This observation backs up the conclusion that organizational commitment
is perceived by TCM as combining different target attitudes and behavioral attitudes, which
they believe to be both confusing and logically incorrect. The attitude-behavioral model can
demonstrate explanations for something that would seem contradictory in the TCM. That is
that affective commitment has stronger associations with relevant behavior and a wider range
of behaviors, compared to normative and continuance commitment. Attitude toward a target
(the organization) is obviously applicable to a wider range of behaviors than an attitude
toward a specific behavior (staying). After their research, Sollinger, Olffen, and Roe believe
Eagly and Chaiken's attitude-behavior model from 1993 would be a good alternative model to
look at as a general organizational commitment predictor because of its approach at
organizational commitment as a singular construct, which in turn would help predicting
various behaviors beyond turnover.
VI. FACTORS THAT IMPACT JOB COMMITMENT
Role Stress
Dysfunctions in role performance have been associated with a large number of
consequences, almost always negative, which affect the well being of workers and
functioning of organizations. An individual's experience of receiving incompatible or
conflicting requests (role conflict) and/or the lack of enough information to carry out his/her
job (role ambiguity) are causes of role stress. Role ambiguity and conflict decrease worker's
performance and are positively related to the probability of the workers leaving the
4


organization. Role conflict and ambiguity have been proposed as determining factors of
workers' job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Empowerment
Empowerment in the workplace has had several different definitions over the years. It
has been considered 'energizing followers through leadership, enhancing self efficacy by
reducing powerlessness and increasing intrinsic task motivation.' A psychological view of
empowerment describes it as 'a process of intrinsic motivation, perceived control,
competence, and energizing towards achieving goals.' There are two prominent concepts of
empowerment. The first is Structural Empowerment which comes from the
Organizational/Management Theory and is described as the ability to get things done and to
mobilize resources. The second is Psychological Empowerment which comes from Social
Psychological models and is described as psychological perceptions/attitudes of employees
about their work and their organizational roles.
Job Insecurity and Employability
In a study conducted by De Cuyper research found that workers who were on fixedterm contracts or considered "temporary workers" reported higher levels of job insecurity
than permanent workers. Job insecurity was found to negatively correlate with job
satisfaction and affective organizational commitment in permanent workers. The study also
found that job satisfaction and organizational commitment were highly correlated with being
a permanent worker.
Distribution of Leadership
A study conducted by Hulpia et al. focused on the impact of the distribution of
leadership and leadership support among teachers and how that affected job satisfaction and
commitment. The study found that there was a strong relationship between organizational
commitment and the cohesion of the leadership team and the amount of leadership support.
VII. FORCES FOR COMMITMENT
An alternative explanation of behavioral stability lies in the concept of commitment.
As a force directing behavior, it must be conceptually differentiated from current motivation
models - specifically, expectancy and equity. For this reason, commitment will be defined
here as a stabilizing force that acts to maintain behavioral direction when expectancy/equity
conditions are not met and do not function. Scholl (1981) posits there are at least four
possible commitment mechanisms that force an individual to be committed: (1) investments,
(2) reciprocity, (3) lack of alternatives, and (4) identification.
Investments
Based on Becker's (1960) early arguments, a number of empirical investigations have
attempted to verify the proposition that individual investments into a particular organization
act as a stabilizing or maintenance mechanism. Specifically, investments (termed "side bets"
by Becker) are posited to decrease an individual's propensity to leave the organization.
Investments can be thought of as contributions whereby a future gain from present
participation is tied to continuance of membership (Kantor, 1968). In terms of
inducements/contributions, there is a time lag in the exchange: the individual makes a
contribution today in expectation of future inducements. This is posited to tie the individual
5


to the organization, even when the individual becomes dissatisfied with aspects of the
exchange. The concept of "paying dues" nicely captures this idea. Investments can also be
viewed in terms of alternative opportunities forgone (Blau, 1967).
Reciprocity
Although the literature does not deal specifically with reciprocity as a mechanism of
organizational commitment, one can clearly see how the norm of reciprocity would act to
hold individuals into a system when either exchange relationships were dissatisfying or more
attractive opportunities existed. The most specific theoretical formulation of the norm of
reciprocity has been presented by Gouldner (1960), who holds that reciprocity is a
generalized and probably universal norm. Specifically, the norm is that (1) people should
help those who have helped them, and (2) people should not harm those who have helped
them. Whereas investments accrue as individuals make contributions that will be rewarded at
a future time, reciprocity would work in the opposite fashion: an individual would receive a
benefit, such as training or an opportunity beyond his or her current ability, and would expect
to repay it through future performance. If the norm of reciprocity holds, we would expect that
the debt incurred through advance rewards would act to hold the individual into a particular
system until the debt was repaid. Additionally, we would not expect individuals to leave if
doing so would cause any harm to an employer who has helped them.
Social Identity
As Friedman and Havighurst (1954]) discovered, work is a major source of status and
identification for a large number of individuals. It seems likely that, as an individual becomes
more embedded in a social identity, change would become more difficult. This notion has
been difficult to test empirically because a number of conceptualizations of commitment
include identification as a component of commitment (Buchanan, 1974; Porter et al., 1974;
Sheldon, 1971). If we stick to the concept of commitment as a force leading to consistency of
action, it seems reasonable to view identification as a process that increases commitment.
Specifically, identification can be defined as the linking of one's social identity to a specific
social role. In operationalizing this definition, Stevens, Beyer, and Trice (1978 ) found that
identification was one of a number of factors leading to a decreased propensity to leave the
organization among federal service managers. Thus, we can posit that if an alternative
opportunity does not allow for maintenance of a particular social identity, we would expect
that an individual's commitment to that opportunity would be increased.
Lack of Alternatives
In the course of careers, individuals develop job related skills and abilities. Some of
these skills sets are based what Becker (1993) termed general training; training for skills
applicable to many organizations and even many career paths. Pursuing an MBA degree is an
example of general training. Becker also identified a type of training he called specific
training; training for skills that are use explicitly while employed by one's current
organization. These skills are general non-portable and non-transferable to other
organizations.

6


VIII. GUIDELINES TO ENHANCE ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
Five rules that help to enhance organizational commitment are:
1. Commit to people-first values
The values of the organization have to be put in to writing. The organization
should also hire the right-kind managers, and walk the talk.
2. Clarify and communicate your mission
Commitment can be enhances by Clarifying the mission and ideology of the
organization and also making it charismatic; The organization should also use
value-based hiring practices and stress on value-based orientation and training
and should also put effort in building tradition.
3. Guarantee organizational justice
The organization should have a comprehensive grievance procedure and can
also provide for extensive two-way communications.
4. Community of practice
Organizational commitment can also be enhanced by building value-based
homogeneity and also by sharing it alike. The organization must emphasize on
barn raising, cross-utilization, and teamwork. It should also strive in getting
people to work together.
5. Support employee development
The organization should commit to actualizing and provide first-year job
challenge. It should enrich, empower and promote the employee from within
and also provide developmental activities and provide employee security
without guarantees.
IX. HIGH COMMITMENT WORK PRACTICES
Commitment according to Jaw and Liu (2004) is not only a human relation concept
but also involves generating human energy and activating human mind. Without
commitment, the implementation of new ideas and initiatives will be compromised. Human
resource system can facilitate the development or organizational competencies through
eliciting employees’ commitment to the firm (Arthur, 1994; Boxall & Macky, 2009). Hence
organizations with a fit business strategy, structure and practices and policy might perform
better, Walton (1995) prescribed “commitment” as a distinctive strategy for HRM whose
positive effect will be felt. High commitment work practice according to Guest (2003) is an
approach to managing employees, which emphasizes is on the need to develop organizational
commitment amongst employees based on the assumption that it will lead to positive
outcomes such as low labor turn over, absenteeism, better motivation and improved
7


performance. Several academic researches on human resource management practices
suggested that high commitment human resource practices will increase organizational
effectiveness by creating a condition whereby employees become highly motivated and
involved in the organizational activities aimed at achieving organizational goals (Arthur,
1994; Abu-Baker, 2010; Boxall & Macky, 2009). Superior performance has been linked with
organizations that implement this practices based on the fact that ‘commitment approach’ as
classified by (Walton, 1995) is used, which aims at increasing effectiveness, productivity and
rely on conditions that encourages employees to identify with the goals of the organization
and also work in order to achieve common goals (Sweetman, 2001). Moreover, recent studies
have shown that high commitment practices can work well synergistically and a reflective of
a general commitment strategy (Sweetman, 2001). Evidences derived from social science
researches have shown that there is now a broad agreement amongst commentators that high
commitment work practices do improve performance, labour productivity and the quality of
service (Boxall & Macky, 2009; Marchington 1994; Pfeffer 1994). Although researchers such
as Boxall and Macky (2009) and Purcell, Kinnie, Hutchinson, Rayton and Swart (2003) have
argued that the majority of previous studies have looked at high commitment work practices
from the employers’ perspective, and the over dependence on such perspectives can
sometimes be mis-leading and will not present the real impact on organizational performance.
Nevertheless, when employees positively interpret high commitment work practices, it will
sequentially increase their commitment to the organization, thereby increasing their
individual performances and hence organizational performance will also increase (Purcell et
al.,2003; Peccei, 2004). Although a commitment strategy can be tied to all company human
resource practices; recruitment, selection, performance evaluation, according to Scholl
(2003), it can also be used to develop psychological connections between the company and
employee as a means of achieving goals (Arthur, 1994; Scholl, 2003).
X. CONCLUSION
From the above study, there is progress in our understanding of commitment and
organizational commitment, both conceptually, and, more practically, in terms of the positive
consequences for organizations of having committed employees. Evidence clarifies that
investment in employees can have positive financial consequences for firms and their
shareholders, and may help broaden their narrow view of the world. Its identified that
employee perception is the foundation of employee motivation, leading to higher
organization commitment, and that employee perception forms the antecedent of
organizational commitment. Positive employee perception leads to improved employee
motivation, which in turn, leads to higher organizational commitment. As upbringing, race
and religion are key factors influencing employee perception, a clear understanding of the
meaning of organizational commitment among all persons concerned, such as researchers,
respondents, practitioners and academicians is vital.
REFERENCE
1.

2.

Ahmad, Nora et al. "Empowerment, job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A
comparative analysis of nurses working in Malaysia and England", Journal of Nursing
Management, United Kingdom, July 2010.
Becker, G. 1993 “Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special
Reference to Education”-(3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8


3.
4.

5.

6.

7.
8.

9.

10.
11.
12.

13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

18.

19.

Becker HS (1960)-“Notes on the concept of commitment”- Am. J. Sociol. 66: 32−40.
Concha, Anton. "The impact of role stress on workers' behaviour through job
satisfaction and organizational commitment"-International Journal of Psychology,
Spain, June 2009.
De Cuyper, Nele. "Job insecurity and employability in fixed-term contractors, agency
workers, and permanent workers: Associations with job satisfaction and affective
organizational commitment"-Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, US, April
2009.
Hulpia, Hester et al. "The relationship between the perception of distributed leadership
in secondary schools and teachers’ and teacher leaders’ job satisfaction and
organizational commitment" School Effectiveness and School Improvement, United
Kingdom, September 2009.
Kanter, R. (1968)-“Commitment and social organization: A study of commitment
mechanisms in utopian communities”- American Sociological Review, 33, 499-517.
Meyer, J P and Allen,NJ (1991).-“A three-component conceptualization of
organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations”-Human Resource
Management Review, 1, pp. 61-98.
Meyer, JP and Allen, NJ (2007)-“A three-component conceptualization of
organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations”-Human Resource
Management Review, 1, pp. 61-98.
Mowday, R., Porter, L., and Steers, R. (2006)-“Employee Organization Linkages’New York: Academic Press.
Neerpal Rathi “Psychological Well-Being and Organizational Commitment:
Exploration of the Relationship” Working Paper No.106/2011-August 2011
Owoyemi Oluwakemi Ayodeji, Oyelere, Michael, Elegbede, Tunde ,Gbajumo-Sheriff,
Mariam - “Enhancing Employees’ Commitment to Organization through Training”International Journal of Business and Management Vol. 6, No. 7; July 2011
Solinger, O. N., van Olffen, W., & Roe, R. A. (2008)-“Beyond the three-component
model of organizational commitment”- Journal Of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 70-83
Wiener, Y. 1982-“Commitment in organizations. A normative view”-Academy of
Management Review. 7(3). Pp:418-428
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/-Ms.AnvitiGupta/Organizational Commitment:
Basic Concepts & Recent Developments.html
http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/scholl/webnotes/Commitment.htm
C.Ramanigopal, “Knowledge Management Strategies in Higher Education”,
International Journal of Advanced Research in Management (IJARM), Volume 3,
Issue 1, 2012, pp. 20 - 29. ISSN Print: 0976 – 6324, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6332.
C.Murali Kumaran and Dr.M.Sivasubramanian, “A Study on Organisational
Citizenship Behaviour and Organisational Commitment Among Employees”,
International Journal of Management (IJM), Volume 4, Issue 4, 2013, pp. 103 - 110,
ISSN Print: 0976-6502, ISSN Online: 0976-6510.
C. S. Ramanigopal, G. Palaniappan and A. Mani, “Mind Mapping and Knowledge
Management: Coding and Implementation of KM System”, International Journal of
Management (IJM), Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 250 - 259, ISSN Print: 0976-6502,
ISSN Online: 0976-6510.

9

10220140502001

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (19)

Destacado

Destacado (20)

Similar a 10220140502001

Similar a 10220140502001 (20)

Más de IAEME Publication

Más de IAEME Publication (20)

Último

Último (20)

10220140502001