Forster

159
Article

Job Satisfaction and Organizational

Commitment Relationship: Effect of
Personality Variables

Vision
17(2) 159167
2013 MDI
SAGE Publications
Los Angeles, London,
New Delhi, Singapore,
Washington DC
DOI: 10.1177/0972262912483529
http://vision.sagepub.com

Shalini Srivastava

Abstract
The purpose of the study was to explore the relationship between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment and to investi-
gate the moderating effects of Trust and Locus of Control on the relationship between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment.
The study was administered on 247 middle level managers belonging to private sector organizations. Four validated instruments were
used in the study. Statistical tools like Descriptive Statistics, Factor Analysis, Pearson Product Moment Correlation and Hierarchical
Regression Analysis were used to analyze the data. The study found that Job satisfaction was positively related to Organizational
Commitment and Trust and Locus of Control moderated Job satisfaction and Organizational Commitment relationship. The findings of
this study can assist the administrator and policy makers to understand the managerial effectiveness from the perspective of personal
traits. Efforts can be made to explore managers perception towards themselves and their roles. The future academic endeavours
might make use of the present study as a stepping-stone for further exploratory and confirmatory research towards a more complete
understanding of the satisfaction considerations in particular.

Key Words
Research Paper, Organizational Commitment, Locus of Control, Trust, Job Satisfaction, Private Sector Managers

Organizations over the years are confronted with one of the

toughest challenge of having a committed workforce in
order to feature in the worldwide economic competition.
The factors that lead to Organizational Commitment have
suddenly started gaining a lot of attention. In a nonprofessionals word, commitment is nothing but a positive
attitude towards something.
Some authors have argued that organizational
commitment, as a construct, is too broad for effective
organizational analyses (Benkhoff, 1997). In response,
Meyer and Allen (1991) proposed a distinction between the
dimensions of affective commitment, continuance
commitment and normative commitment. Affective
commitment refers to employees perceptions of their
emotional attachment to or identification with their
organization. Continuous commitment refers to employees
perceptions of the costs associated with leaving the
organization. Finally, normative commitment refers to
employees perceptions of their obligation to their
organization. For instance, if an organization is loyal to the
employee or has supported his/her educational efforts, the
employee may report higher degrees of normative
commitment. This reflects a difference between a
preference to stay with the present organization arising out

of a sense of attachment, compared to one rooted in a sense

of economic necessity or of moral obligation (Gallie et al.,
2001, p. 1085). This three-pronged classification allows
for identification of the underlying basis for each type of
commitment and researchers have clarified the unique
antecedents and outcomes related to each type (Meyer
et al., 2002). Like job satisfaction, reliable measures of the
three types of commitment have also been developed and
validated (Meyer and Allen, 1991).

Job Satisfaction
It is a positive feeling towards ones job. In the works of
Newstrom (2007), Job Satisfaction is a set of favourable
or unfavourable feelings and emotions with which
employees view their work. An employees interpretation
of values may vary regarding satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
For example, some employees may feel a sense of
accomplishment in their jobs while other employees may
not. The finding by Hackman and Oldhams (1980) was
found to be similar. They surveyed blue and white-collar
workers and determined that completing interesting tasks
was not as important as job security and compensation for
blue-collar employees. The findings also indicated that

160
interesting and varied assignments were of higher
importance to white-collar workers when compared to
blue-collar workers (Hackman and Oldham, 1980).

Trust
There is an evidence that workers of all generations are
sceptical of their organizations and have many reasons for
their distrust (Brandes et al., 2008). In addition to the
growing acceptance that trust is a multi-dimensional
concept, organizational researchers are starting to realize
that just like organizational commitment, trust has multiple
bases and foci or referents. McCauley and Kuhnet (1992)
identified the notion that trust consists of lateral and
vertical elements. Lateral trust according to them was the
relationship among the employees whereas, vertical trust
referred to the trust amongst the employee, his supervisor,
his subordinates and top management. The pervasiveness
of trust and distrust in the workplace is well documented in
the literature (e.g., Barber, 1983; Fox, 1974; Kanter, 1977;
Kramer, 1996; Kramer and Tyler, 1985; Sitkin and Roth,
1993; Whitner et al., 1998). The extant research focuses on
how subordinates trust in managers affect their (i.e.,
subordinates) perceptions, behaviour and job related
outcomes (e.g., Ross, 1994; Fulk et al., 1985). However,
according to our knowledge, research on the question of
how managers trust in subordinates may influence the
managers control behaviour (i.e., how the managers
control subordinates when they trust and distrust) is
extremely rare.

Locus of Control
Locus of Control refers to the extent to which people
believe them or external factors such as chance and
powerful others are in control of the events that influences
their lives (Firth et al., 2004).
One of the most important variables that has been
extensively researched in organizational settings is Locus
of Control. Numerous researches have opined that
employees with internal locus of control are more
contended with their jobs, they are less stressed and
resulting in elongated job term (Spector, 1982). A study
done in the past revealed that employees with internal
locus of control owned the authority to make judgement
and perceive challenges as an opportunity for knowledge
and professional development (Knoop, 1981). In contrast,
someone with an external locus of control would close the
eyes to these challenges due to their intellect that learning
will not have a bang on him or her. Findings of a study by
Judge et al. (1998) confirmed that locus of control is highly
linked with self-efficacy. They define self-efficacy as ones
estimation of ones potential to marshal the motivation,
Vision, 17, 2 (2013): 159167

Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment Relationship

cognitive capital and route of action needed to implement
general rule over events in ones life.

Job Satisfaction and Organizational

Commitment
Numerous studies use different facets of satisfaction to
predict employee attributes such as performance,
organizational commitment and service quality (Dienhart
and Gregoire,1993; Oshagbemi, 2000a, 2000b; Yousef,
1998). It is a debateable issue whether job satisfaction is
the predictor of organizational commitment or vice versa.
Several researchers have made the case that job satisfaction
is a predictor of organizational commitment (Porter et al.,
1974; Price, 1977; Rose, 1991). Slattery and Selvarajan
(2005) examined the associations between job satisfaction,
organizational commitment and turnover intention among
temporary employees. They found positive associations
between job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Several studies have focused directly on testing the causal
relationship between job satisfaction and organizational
commitment (Bateman and Strasser, 1984; Curry et al.,
1986; Dossett and Suszko, 1990; Farkas and Tetrick, 1989;
Lance, 1991).
Pettijohn et al. (2001) examined the relationships
existing between performance appraisals, salesperson
organizational commitment and job satisfaction. If various
characteristics of performance appraisals that build
commitment and satisfaction could be identified, then
managers may be more capable of using performance
appraisals that yield positive results. A survey of 185 retail
salespeople and 58 retail sales managers provided the data
required to evaluate the relationship between satisfaction,
commitment and various aspects of performance appraisals.
The results of the study indicate that managerially mediated
factors may be used to enhance salesperson job satisfaction
and organizational commitment.
When an employee leaves, organizations incur hiring,
orientation and decreased productivity costs as well as
temporary replacement costs. Estimates of these substantial
costs are 1.2 to 1.3 times the one year salary of a registered
nurse (RN) (Jones, 2004, 2005) to replace a single RN, or
up to 5 per cent of a hospitals budget for yearly turnover
costs (Waldman et al., 2004). These costs often are paid by
the government as a major payer of health care costs in the
United States.
The present study, wants to gauge the relationship
between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment.
Thus, the first hypothesis for the present study is:
H1: Job-Satisfaction and Organizational Commit
ment will show a positive relationship.

161

Shalini Srivastava

Locus of Control and

Organizational Commitment
Locus of control is linked to a range of variables concerning
internals and externals on diverse sets of principles
(Spector, 1982). He states that internals are devoted more
to their respective organizations and are more contented
with their work than those with an external locus of control.
Those with an internal locus of control are also likely to
continue in their jobs longer and they have a propensity to
execute better. The individual trait of locus of control was
found to temperate the control of work-related quality on
job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Loscocco
and Roschelle, 1991).

Locus of Control and Job

Satisfaction
For years, industrial psychologists and organizational
behaviourists have debated the influence of a persons
disposition on job satisfaction. Various researchers have
argued the person versus situation debate (Judge et al.,
1998; Bell and Staw, 1989). Bell and Staw (1989)
considered locus of control to be a dispositional
(personality) trait. As a personality characteristic, internal
locus of control is hypothesized to be an important variable
that influences the employee. The internalexternal locus
of control of a person has a tremendous impact on his
performance and job satisfaction (Brownell, 1981; Dailey,
1980; Kasperson, 1982). A study conducted by Dailey on
scientists in the year 1980 found that scientists with an
internal locus of control were more satisfied, motivated
and had a high level of participation within their jobs as
compared with those who had external locus of control.
Those scientists were associated with low job satisfaction
and psychological distress. Research has also shown that
having an internal locus of control is related to
organizational satisfaction (Organ and Greene, 1974).
Internals are more inclined to take action, are better
performers and consequently receive promotions and
rewards related to their performance.

Trust and Organizational

Commitment
Moye (2003) examined the extent to which employee
empowerment and employee commitment to the
organization are related to interpersonal-level and systemlevel trust in the organization. The results indicated
that employees who possess higher levels of commitment
to the organization also possess higher levels of
interpersonal-level trust and system-level trust. Employees
who feel empowered in their work environment also tend

to have higher levels of interpersonal-level trust and

system-level trust.

Trust, Locus of Control, Job

Satisfaction and Organizational
Commitment Relationship
An important element in building a successful organization
is trust. Organizational trust provides the basis for
employees motivation, effective team-building, open
communication and employee retention. An employee will
be committed to the organization if he trusts the organization
of its capabilities and its limitations. When trust is a
guiding principle in the corporate culture, it provides a
firm foundation to build job satisfaction and commi-
tted staff (DeFrank and Ivancevich, 1998). When trust
becomes less than a back-and-forth commitment, there is a
potential for a decrease in employees Job Satisfaction and
Commitment to the task at hand and to the organization as
a whole. Similarly, employees with Internal Locus of
Control will tend to be more satisfied with their jobs
because they will try to introspect for any unpleasant
situation before reacting to it. This dimension of personality
will make him more adjustable and thus, will be more
satisfied and committed to their job. Studies usually
recommend that internal subjects have a propensity to be
more content with their job than the external ones. They
see their superiors as higher on concern and initiating
composition account, less role stress, observe more
sovereignty and control and have a tendency to support
elongated job term (Spector, 1982) .
Although there have been numerous studies linking job
satisfaction with other personality variables, the moderating
role of Trust and Locus of Control on the relationship
between Job satisfaction and Organizational commitment
of Managers has not received much attention. Increasing or
decreasing level of trust certainly affects the intensity or
the nature of relationship between Job Satisfaction and
Organizational Commitment.
The present study intends to fulfil this vacuum by
testing the postulation that Trust and locus of control serves
as a moderator for Job satisfaction and Organizational
commitment relationship.
Thus, the hypothesis are:
H2: Trust moderates the effect of Job satisfaction on
Organizational Commitment.
H3: Internal Locus of control moderates the effect
of Job satisfaction on Organizational Commit-
ment.
Objectives of the study: The study aims to examine JobSatisfaction and Organizational Commitment relationship
Vision, 17, 2 (2013): 159167

162

Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment Relationship

Figure 1. Conceptual Model of Hypotheses

Independent Variable

Moderating Variable
H1

Job Satisfaction
H2

+ve

Dependent Variable

+ve
H3

Trust

Internal Locus of Control

Organizational Commitment
+ve

Source: Developed by the author on the basis of data collected for the present study.

and the moderating effects of Internal Locus of control and

Trust on Job-Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment
relationship.

Conceptual Model of Hypotheses

Based on the research presented in the literature review, a
conceptual model is developed. The model postulates the
relationship between Job Satisfaction and Organizational
Commitment and the moderating effects of Trust and
Internal Locus of control (Figure 1).

Method
The present study was done on middle level managers.
They belonged to BPO, Banks and IT Sectors. The sample
size was 247. Descriptive statistics along with Exploratory
Factor Analysis, Pearson Product Moment Correlation and
Regression Analysis was used for data analysis.

Measures
Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ): A
15 item scale developed by Mowday et al. (1979) was
used for the study. It examines the possible feelings the
individuals may have about the organization for which
they work and is measured on a seven-point Likert scale
ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree
(7). The Cronbach was found to be 0.76 for this scale.
Job Satisfaction survey (JSS): The Scale was developed
by Paul E. Spector, Department of Psychology,
University of South Florida (1985). It is a 36 item, nine
facet scale to assess employee attitudes about the
job and aspects of the job. Each facet is assessed with
four items and a total score is computed from all
items. The scale was significantly related to workplace
factors such as Pay, Promotion, Supervision, Fringe
Vision, 17, 2 (2013): 159167

benefits, Contingent Rewards, Operation Procedures,

Co-workers, Nature of work, Communication. The
Cronbach was found to be 0.84 for this scale.
Trust Questionnaire: The Trust Questionnaire developed
by Robinson (1996) was used to measure the level of
Commitment. The scale consists of 7 items. Examples
of the items include an example item is In general, I
believe my supervisors motives and intentions are
good, My supervisor is open and upfront with me. The
Cronbach was found to be .86 for this scale.
Locus of Control Inventory (LOCO): Udai Pareek
(1992) developed this scale. The LOCO inventory has
10 items each for internality, externality (others) and
externality (luck). A five-point scale is used in scoring
responses ranging from hardly feel (0) to Strongly
feel (4). The three dimensions of Locus of control are:
Internal (I), External (E-O), External (E-C). The
Cronbach was found to be 0.86 for this scale.

Results
As the KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) measure of sampling
adequacy was found to be adequate (0.60) and the Bartlett
test of sphericity as significant, it indicated that factor
analysis can be conducted. Factor Analysis with principal
axis factoring method and varimax rotation was then used
to cluster the variables into several factors related to Job
Satisfaction Scale and Locus of Control Scale. A minimum
Eigen value of one (1) was used in the factor analysis in
order to control the number of factors extracted. Only six
(6) factors in the section of Job Satisfaction and one in the
section of Locus of Control were retained and interpreted.
These factors are depicted in Tables 1 and 2.
Factor Analysis of Job Satisfaction Scale is depicted in
Table 1. The six factors namely Pay, Promotion, Superiors,
Fringe Benefits, Co-Workers, Contingent Rewards

163

Shalini Srivastava
Table 1. Factor Analysis of Job Satisfaction Scale Rotated
Factor Matrix

Table 2. Factor Analysis of Locus of Control Scale Rotated

Factor Matrix

Factors
Items
Pay 1
Pay 2
Pay 3
Pay 4
Prom 1
Prom 2
Prom 3
Prom 4
Sup 1
Sup 2
Sup 3
Sup 4
Fr.B 1
Fr.B 2
Fr.B 3
Fr.B 4
Co-w 1
Co-w 2
Co w 3
Co w 4
CoR 1
Co R 2
Co R 3
Co R 4
Eigen
Values
%age of
Variance

0.426
0.773
0.528
0.624

0.458
0.732
0.713
0.624

2.46

Factor
4

0.624
0.538
0.618
0.724

2.24

0.534
0.628
0.462
0.726

2.18

2.02

14.26 14.02 13.98

13.26

Item

ILOC 1
ILOC 2
ILOC 3
ILOC 4
ILOC 5
ILOC 6
ILOC 7
ILOC 8
ILOC 9
ILOC 10

0.528
0.452
0.624
0.527
0.728
0.624
0.436
0.612
0.522
0.458

Eigen Value

3.18

Source: Developed by the author on the basis of data collected for the
present study.
Note: ILOC = Internal Locus of Control.

0.427
0.624
0.532
0.626

1.96

accounted for 14.26, 14.02, 13.98, 13.26, 12.82 and 12.26

respectively. The total variance explained by these factors
in combination explained 80.6 per cent of variance.
Principal component analysis with varimax rotation
revealed only one factor with Eigen value of 3.18 was
sorted out. The factor identified from the data was Internal
Locus of control.

0.423
0.511
0.624
0.528
1.68

12.82 12.26

Zero Order Correlation

Table 4 presents the Cronbachs alpha reliabilities, mean
scores, standard deviations and the Zero-order correlations
among the studies variables. As depicted in Table 3, a
significant positive relationship was found between Job

Source: Developed by the author on the basis of data collected for the
present study.
Note: Prom = Promotion, Sup = Superiors; Fr.B = Fringe Benefits,
Cow = Co-Workers; CoR = Contingent Rewards.

Table 3. Means, Standard Deviations, Reliabilities and Correlations among the Variables (N = 247)
Variables
OC
Pay
Prom
Sup
Fr.B
Cow
Co-R
JS
Trust
ILOC
Mean
SD

0.76
0.38**
0.42**
0.46**
0.24**
0.42**
0.36**
0.72**
0.38**
0.48**
72.14
15.34

0.75
0.26**
0.63**
0.56**
0.39**
0.19*
0.64**
0.35**
0.54**
22.13
7.26

0.73
0.44**
0.48*
0.28**
0.35**
0.56**
0.31**
0.62**
24.27
8.12

0.82
0.36** 0.73
0.32** 0.32**
0.28** 0.32**
0.68** 0.72**
0.31** 0.46**
0.56** 0.47**
21.62
23.17
6.88
7.54

0.76
0.42**
0.64**
0.38**
0.56**
27.28
8.64

0.68
0.58**
0.84
0.49**
0.56**
0.37**
0.62**
26.22
128
8.02
24.26

10

0.76
0.44**
4.76
1.15

0.86
24.82
8.24

Source: Developed by the author on the basis of data collected for the present study.
Notes: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

Coefficient alphas are reported along the diagonals.

OC = Organizational Commitment, Prom = Promotion; Sup = Superiors; Fr.B = Fringe Benefits;
Cow = Co-Workers; CoR = Contingent Rewards, ILOC = Internal Locus of Control.

Vision, 17, 2 (2013): 159167

164

Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment Relationship

Table 4. Hierarchical Regression Analysis with Trust as a Moderating Variable

Variables
Step 1
Independent Variables
Pay
Promotion
Supervision
Fringe Benefits
Co-Workers
Contingent Rewards
Job Satisfaction
Step 2
Moderating Variables
Trust
Step 3
Interaction Term
Pay* Trust
Promotion* Trust
Supervision* Trust
Fringe Benefits* Trust
Co-workers* Trust
Contingent Rewards* Trust
Job Satisfaction* Trust

Beta

Adj R

R Change

F Change

0.266

0.252

0.266

0.000

0.584

0.582

0.318

0.000

0.872

0.866

0.288

0.000

0.43**
0.24**
0.28*
0.32**
0.26*
0.42**
0.72**
0.38**

0.34**
0.28**
0.31**
0.26**
0.32**
0.34**
0.43**

Source: Developed by the author on the basis of data collected for the present study.
Note: ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.0.

satisfaction and Organizational Commitment (r = 0.72,

p < 0.01) thereby supporting Hypothesis 1.

Hierarchical Regression Analysis

To test the main effect and find if Trust and internal Locus
of Control moderates the relationship between Job
Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment, a hierarchical moderated regression analysis was conducted.
As indicated in Step 1, in the coefficient of determination
(R2) was found to be 0.26 indicating that Job Satisfaction
explains 26.6 per cent of Organizational Commitment. In
step 2, by adding Trust as independent variables, the R2
increased to 58.4 per cent which was found to be significant.
It can thus be implied that the additional 31.8 per cent of
the variation in Organizational commitment is explained
by Trust. As can be seen from Table 4, Job Satisfaction had
a positive relationship with Organizational Commitment,
which proves our first hypothesis.
The interactive effects of trust and various dimensions of Job Satisfaction on predicting Organizational
Commitment was also examined in the last step of
hierarchical regression. It can be seen that the additional
variance explained by the interaction term of 28.8 per cent
was significant at .01 level. The result derived from the
final step proved our second hypothesis of the study that
Trust serves as a moderator for Job Satisfaction and
Organizational Commitment relationship.
Vision, 17, 2 (2013): 159167

When Internal Locus of Control was entered into the

equation in order to gauge its impact on the Organizational
Commitment, it was perceived that the R2 increased from
26.6 per cent to 76.4 per cent (Table 5).Thus, it explains
that 49.8 per cent of change which is significant at .01 level
is due to Internal Locus of Control.
In the last step, it can be seen that the additional variance
explained by the interaction term of 17.2 per cent which
was significant at 0.01 level proved our third hypothesis
of the study that Internal Locus of control serves as
a moderator for Job Satisfaction and Organizational
Commitment relationship.
Figure 2 further shows the finding summary of the
regression analyses.

Discussion and Conclusion

The foremost aim of the current study was to find out the
effect of Job satisfaction on Organizational commitment and
explore the moderating outcome of Trust and Locus of
control on Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment
relationship. Results of the study have proved the hypotheses.
The result derived that Job Satisfaction is positively related
to Organizational Commitment. The result found has found
a strong evidence from the study done in the past (Koslowsky
et al., 1991; Knoop, 1995; Shore and Martin, 1989). The
moderating roles of Trust and Locus of control between Job
satisfaction and Organizational Commitment relationship,

165

Shalini Srivastava
Table 5. Hierarchical Regression Analysis with Internal Locus of Control as a Moderating Variable
Variables

Beta

Step 1
Independent Variables
Pay
Promotion
Supervision
Fringe Benefits
Co-Workers
Contingent Rewards
Job Satisfaction
Step 2
Moderating Variables
ILOC
Step 3
Interaction Term
Pay* ILOC
Promotion* ILOC
Supervision* ILOC
Fringe Benefits* ILOC
Co-workers* ILOC
Contingent Rewards
Job Satisfaction* ILOC

Adj R

R Change

F Change

0.266

0.252

0.266

0.000

0.764

0.762

0.498

0.000

0.936

0.929

0.172

0.000

0.43**
0.24**
0.28*
0.32**
0.26*
0.42**
0.72**
0.48**

0.24**
0.32**
0.18**
0.19**
0.20**
0.34**
0.46**

Source: Developed by the author on the basis of data collected for the present study.
Note: ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.0.

has not received much attention in earlier studies. Though

few studies have supported the relationship between
organizational commitment and trust (Buch and Aldridge,
1991; Robinson, 1996; Rousseau,1989), Locus of control
and Job Satisfaction ((Dailey, 1980; Brownell, 1981;
Kasperson, 1982; Organ and Greene, 1974), Locus of
Control and Organizational Commitment. Both the
moderating effects of Trust and Locus of Control have not
been studied as per my knowledge. The present study
derived that Managers with Internal Locus of control are
more satisfied with their jobs and hence they are more

Figure 2. Findings Summary of Regression

+PFGRGPFGPV8CTKCDNG
,QD5CVKUHCEVKQP

committed towards their Organization. Managers with

Internal locus of control will be able to handle stressful
situations more effectively and thus, will be more efficient.
Similarly, Managers trust in the Organization has a positive
impact on Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment
relationship. Trust helps in making a satisfied employee
more committed to the organization.
The previous work shows that the present study is the
first to consider the moderating effect of Locus of Control
and Trust on Job Satisfaction-Organizational Commitment
relationship.

/QFGTCVKPI8CTKCDNG





&GRGPFGPV8CTKCDNG
1TICPK\CVKQPCN%QOOKVOGPV

 6TWUV
 +PVGTPCN.QEWUQH%QPVTQN
Source: Developed by the author on the basis of data collected for the present study.

Vision, 17, 2 (2013): 159167

166

Managerial Implications
The findings of this study can assist administrator and
policy makers to understand the managerial effectiveness
from the perspective of personal traits. Efforts can be made
to explore managers perception towards themselves and
their roles. Managers can be helped to develop control over
the situation instead of being externally controlled. Trust
can help in strengthening the link between organizational
commitment and Job satisfaction. A manager who has an
internal locus of control will tend to be more satisfied and
thus, his behaviour will reflect commitment towards the
organization. For an Organization it is the need of an
hour because a committed staff will lead to a healthy
organization.

Limitations and Scope for

Future Study
One of the most important limitation of the present study is
that the impact of gender on job Satisfaction and
Organizational Commitment could not be ascertained. The
literature shows that women are bound to be more
dominated by external control than men. The future
academic endeavours might make use of the present study
as a stepping stone for further exploratory and confirmatory
research towards a more complete understanding of the
satisfaction considerations in particular.
References
Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust. New Jersey:
Rutgers University Press.
Bateman, T.S., & Strasser, S. (1984). A longitudinal analysis of
the antecedents of organizational commitment. Academy of
Management Journal, 27(1), 95112.
Bell, N., & Staw, B. (1989). People as sculptors versus sculpture:
The roles of personal and personal control in organizations. In
J. Ott (Ed.), Classic readings in organizational behavior (pp.
365378). Florida: Harcourt Brace & Company.
Benkhoff, B. (1997). Disentangling organizational commitment.
Personnel Review, 26, 114131.
Brandes, P., Castro, S.L., James, M., Martinez, A.D., Matherly,
T.A., Ferris, G.R., & Hochwarter, W. (2008). Interactive
effects of job insecurity and organisational cynicism on
work effort following layoff. Journal of Leadership and
Organisational Studies, 14, 233247.
Brownell, P. (1981). Participation in budgeting, locus of control
and organizational effectiveness. The Accounting Review, 56,
844860.
Buch, K., & Aldridge, J. (1991). O. D. under conditions of organization decline. Organization Development Journal, 9, 15.
Curry, J.P., Wakefield, D.S., Price, J.L., & Mueller, C.W. (1986).
On the causal order of job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 847858.

Vision, 17, 2 (2013): 159167

Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment Relationship

Dailey, R. (1980). Relationship between locus of control, task
characteristics, and work attitudes. Psychological Reports,
47, 855861.
DeFrank, R., & Ivancevich, J. (1998). Stress on the job: An
executive update. Academy of Management Executive, 12(2),
5556.
Dienhart, J.R., & Gregoire, M.B. (1993). Job satisfaction, job
involvement, job security and customer focus of quickservice restaurant employees. Hospitality Research Journal,
16(2), 2944.
Dossett, D.J., & Suszko, M. (1990). Re-examing the causal direction between job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society
for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Miami, Fl.
Farkas, A.J., & Tetrick, L.E. (1989). A three-wave longitudinal
analysis of thecausal ordering of satisfaction and commitment on turnover decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology,
74, 855868.
Firth, L., Mellor, D.J., Moore, K.A., & Loquet, C. (2004). How
can managers reduce employee intention to quit? Journal
Managerial Psychology, 19(1/2), 17087.
Fox, A. (1974). Beyond contract: Work, power and trust relations. London: Faber and Faber Limited.
Fulk, J., Brief, A.P., & Barr, S.H. (1985) Trust-in-supervisor
and perceived fairness and accuracy of performance evaluations.Journal of Business Research, 13, 299313.
Gallie, D., Felstead, A., & Green, F. (2001). Employer policies and organizational commitment in Britain 19921997.
Journal of Management Studies, 38, 10811101.
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading.
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Jones, C.B. (2004). The costs of nurse turnover, Part 1: An
economic perspective. Journal of Nursing Administration,
34(12), 562570.
(2005). The costs of nurse turnover, Part 2: Application of
the nursing turnover cost calculation methodology. Journal of
Nursing Administration, 35(1), 4149.
Judge, T., Locke, E., Durham, C., & Kluger, A. (1998).
Dispositional effects on job satisfactions and life satisfaction:
The role of core evaluations. Journal of applied psychology,
83, 1734.
Kanter, R.M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Kasperson, C. (1982). Locus of control and job dissatisfaction.
Psychological Reports, 50, 823826.
Knoop, R. (1981). Locus of control as a moderator between job
characteristics and job attitudes. Psychological Reports, 48,
519525.
(1995). Relationships among job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment for nurses. The
Journal of Psychology, 129(6), 643649.
Koslowsky, M., Caspy,T., & Lazar, M. (1991). Cause and effect
explanations of job satisfaction and commitment: The case of
exchange commitment. The Journal of Psychology, 125(2),
153162.
Kramer, R.M. (1996). Divergent realities and convergent disappointments in the hierarchic relation: Trust in organisations
(pp. 216245). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Shalini Srivastava
Kramer, R.M., & Tyler, T.R. (Eds) (1985). Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 1638). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Lance, C.E. (1991). Evaluation of a structural model relating job
satisfaction, organizational commitment, and precursors to
voluntary turnover. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26,
137162.
Loscocco, K.A., & Roschelle, A.R. (1991). Influences on the
quality of work and nonwork life: Two decades in review.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 39, 182225.
Meyer, J.P., & Allen, N.J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource
Management Review, 1, 6189.
Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., & Gellatly, I.R. (1990). Affective and
continuance commitment to the organization: Evaluation of
measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 710720.
Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnyutsky,
L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment
to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates,
and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61,
2052.
McCauley, D.P., & Kuhnert, K.W. (1992). A theoretical review
and empirical investigation of employee trust in management.
Public Administration Quarterly, 16(2), 265282.
Mowday, R., Steers, R., & Porter, L. (1979). The measurement of
organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
14, 224247.
Moye, M.J. (2003). The relationship of employee empowerment
and commitment to the organization to interpersonal and
system-level trust, Dissertation-Abstracts-International:Section-B, The Sciences-and-Engineering, 64 (4-B): 1931.
Newstorm, Davis. (2007). Organisation behaviour. Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill Publishing Co Ltd.
Northcraft, G., & Neale, M. (1987). Experts, amateurs, and real
estate: An anchoring and adjustment perspective on property
pricing decisions. Organizational Behaviour and Human
Decision Processing, 39, 8497.
Organ, D., & Greene, C. (1974). Role ambiguity, locus of control
and work satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59,
101102.
Oshagbemi, T. (2000a). Correlates of pay satisfaction in higher
education. International Journal of Educational Management,
14(1), 3139.
. (2000b). Is length of service related to the level of job
satisfaction? International Journal of Social Economics,
27(3), 213226.
Pareek, U. (1992). The Pfeiffer library. 8, (2nd edn). JosseyBass: Pfieffer.
Paul E. Spector, Department of Psychology, University of
South Florida (1985). Available at http://shell.cas.usf.
edu/~pspector/scales/jsspag.html
Pettijohn, C.E., Pettijohn, L.S., & Taylor, A.J. (2000) Research
note: An exploratory analysis of salesperson perceptions of
the criteria used in performance appraisals, job satisfaction
and organizational commitment. The Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 20(2), 7780.

167
Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T., & Boulian, P.V.
(1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and
turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 59, 603609.
Price, J.L. (1977). The study of turnover. Ames, IA: Iowa State
University Press.
Robinson, S.L. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological
contract. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 574599.
Rose, R.W. (1991). Comparisons of employee turnover in food
and beverage and other departments in hotel properties. Ann
Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertations Services.
Ross, A. (1994). Trust as a moderator of the effect of performance evaluation style on job-related tension: A research
note. Accounting Organizations and Society, 19(7),
629635.
Rousseau, D.M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in
organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal,
2, 121139.
Shore, L.M., & Martin, H.J. (1989). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment in relation to work performance and
turnover intentions. Human Relations, 42, 625638.
Sitkin, S.B., & Roth, N.L. (1993). Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic remedies for trust/mistrust. Organisation
Science, 4, 367392.
Slattery, Jeffrey P. & Selvarajan, T.T. Rajan (2005). Antecedents
to temporary employees turnover intentions. Submitted
for possible inclusion in the program for the organisation
behaviour and organisational theory track at the March 31
April 2, 2005, Midwest Academy of Managements Annual
Meeting.
Spector, P.E. (1982). Behavior in organizations as a function of
employees locus of control. Psychological Bulletin, 91(3),
482497.
Waldman, J.D., Kelly, F., Arora, S., & Smith, H.L. (2004). The
shocking cost of turnover in health care. Health Management
Review, 29(1), 27.
Whitener, M.E., Brodt, E.S., Korsgaard, A.M., & Werner, M.J.
(1998). Managers as initiators oftrust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of Management Review, 23(3),
513530.
Yousef, D.A. (1998). Satisfaction with job security as a predictor
of organizational commitment and job performance in a multicultural environment. International Journal of Manpower,
19(3), 184194.
Shalini Srivastava (shalinisrivastava2@gmail.com) is working
as an Associate Professor (OB & HR) in Jaipuria Institute of
Management, Noida. She teaches Organizational Behaviour and
Training & Development. She has reviewed various research
articles and is a reviewer of various national and international
referred journals. She is also a soft skills trainer and has imparted
training programmes in organizations like NTPC, ONGC, NHPC,
XANSA, Fortis, OBC, etc. Her areas of interest are Employee
Engagement, Student Engagement, Emotional Intelligence,
Personality dimensions and Managerial Effectiveness.

Vision, 17, 2 (2013): 159167

Copyright of Vision (09722629) is the property of Management Development Institute and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.