Chapter-III

Organizational Commitment

3.0 Introduction

Organizations, as one of the significant features of today’s societies are experiencing a rapid

change and the effect of the human forces in these changes is undeniable (Honari, 2004).

According to Robbins (1996), improving the performance of the individuals and

organizations is among the main goals of every active and alive organization, hence studying

the factors effective on the performance of the organizations is the main source in directing

the managers toward achieving this goal. Organizational commitment is one of these

determining factors affecting the employees’ sense of participation in the organization's

activities and performance (Chelladurai, 2009). There are many types of organizations and

educational organizations are among the most important organizations in every society.

Mueller, Wallace and Price (1992) state that a great deal of research has been done by

industrial-organizational and occupational-psychologist while few researches were conducted

on organizational commitment within educational settings. Celep (2000) asserts that human

being as the most important input in any organization finds even more weight in educational

organizations compared to other organizations. The effectiveness of every educational

organization depends on different factors such as the teachers’ organizational commitment.

3.1 Definitions of an Organization

The term organization has been used in so many different ways. Davis (1977) defines an

organisation as a big or small group of individuals who cooperate under the direction of a

leader toward a common object. To Allen (1958), “organisation is the process of identifying

76
and grouping the work to be performed, defining and delegating responsibility and authority,

and establishing relationship for the purpose of enabling people to work most effectively

together in accomplishing objectives."(p. 51).

Publish Your Articles (2012) defines an organization as “related to developing a

framework where the total work is divided into manageable components in order to facilitate

the achievement of objectives or goals.” Therefore, groups of individuals work in an

organization together to attain a common goal. The term organization may refer to in four

different senses, namely as a process, as a structure of a relationship, as a group of persons

and as a system.

As cited in Publish Your Articles (2012), Andrew Canrnegi revealed his confidence in

organization when he said "Take away our factories, take away our trade, our avenues of

transportation, our money, leave nothing but our organization, and in four years, we shall re-

established ourselves." The vital role organizations have been playing is undeniable.

3.2 Characteristics of an organization

According to Hall (1977) definitions of organization focus on characteristics of organizations

either from structural or process point of view. The attitudes and behaviors which facilitate

the performing of organizations differ based on various characteristics of organizations

(Jackson et al., 1989). The whole structure of management is based on organization.

Organization can be described in four different senses: organization as a process, as a

framework of relationships, as a group of individuals, and as a system. The main

characteristics or features of organizations, according to Morye (2012) include: outlining the

objectives, identifying and enumerating the activities, assigning the duties, defining and

granting the authority, and creating authority relationships.

77
 Katz and Gartner (1988) studied the characteristics of the emerging organizations and

recognized four main properties of the emerging organizations, namely intentionality,

resources, boundary, and exchange.

Johnson (2013) holds that a healthy organization must observe the following

characteristics as the main ten characteristics in their corporate culture:

1. Effective sharing of goals between management and employees at every level of

organization

2. Enjoying a team work to collaborate in achieving common goals

3. Having employees with high morale

4. Offering opportunities for training

5. Enjoying a good leadership

6. Handling inadequate performance instead of ignoring it

7. Recognizing the risks and taking protective measures

8. Adapting to probable changes and opportunities

9. Possessing a well-defined structure

10. Benefitting from the well-known organizational policies

The type of organization will be also effect its characteristics. According to Jucevičienè and

Cesevičiütè (2009) the first characteristic of educational organizations is their educational

aims. The second characteristic of educational organization is the aim of learning which

encourages participating in innovative processes. Providing the content of education

compatible with the second characteristic is determined as the third characteristic of the

educational organization followed by the method of learning and teaching as the fourth

characteristic. They also introduce seven more characteristics which include devising the

means of learning and teaching, providing a system of feedbacks, taking the learner into
78
consideration, determining the educators, defining the space and time, providing a hygienic

condition, and finally considering the factors not envisaged in the system.

3.3 University as an Educational Organization

Universities as educational organizations are one of the most significant social institutions in

every society. The efficiency and performance of educational organizations depend on their

perfect coordination in fulfilling the social expectations. An organization may enjoy different

organic, physical, and economic conditions, but its performance will not be affective unless

the human being, as the origin of creativity in the organization, is given the due importance.

The significance of this human force becomes more determining in the educational

organizations than other organizations because “s/he participates at any position of the input-

process-output circle of the educational organizations, ‘input’ is students, ‘process’ is teacher

and ‘output’ is a qualified work.” (Celep, 2000, p. 82). Celep Also asserts that in educational

organizations the attitude is of an outstanding importance. He mostly emphasizes on the

attitude of the teachers and the conditions that motivate them. He clarifies that “the less

committed teachers may both create difficulties and cause the deviations in respect of the

educational aims...”. On the other hand, considering the importance of human forces in

organizations and their role in developing and realizing the organizational goals, the concept

of the efficiency of employees are among the greatest concerns of managers. Universities as a

prime source in training efficient and expert human forces cannot be disregarded.

Fosterbook (2010), states that the concept of organizational efficiency refers to “having

the right people, doing the right job, within an optimal performance environment.” One of the

factors that affect the organizational efficiency is the level of the employees’ commitment.

There are many factors such as interaction among the teachers, teacher-student

communication, the teachers’ conception of their profession, etc. which affect the teachers’

79
level of organizational commitment. Although many researches have been executed on

teachers’ organizational commitment, the question of how to enhance teachers’ commitment

is still a problem.

To Laureate Rabi, in a discussion with General Eisenhower, the faculties of a

university are not the university’s employees, but they are the university itself. Eisenhower

considered universities as organizations like a company or the Army of America, which are

dependent on their employees, instead on being identical with them, while to Rabi,

universities are colleges of teachers. Rabi’s concept of university was a traditional one, while

Eisenhower’s was a modern one. (Cited in Jensen, 2010).

The primary researches in 1960’s on universities as organizations were restricted to

considering universities as mostly collegial, followed by the wave of researches in 1970’s

considering universities as political sphere. Questioning the lack of coordination in

universities, later gave rise to researches abounded with terms like anarchy, management,

leadership, etc. In 1990s, the topic of changes in universities from the point of view of

management theories came to the scene, encouraging the adoption of more managerial values

considering universities more as a business (Jensen, 2010).

3.4 Efficiency of an Educational Organization

In defining the concepts of efficiency and effectiveness, Encyclopaedia of Business (2013)

states that efficiency and effectiveness were first used in engineering and were well

developed in early 20th century emphasizing on time and motion. Generally, efficiency is

synonymous with terms such as effectiveness, competency, productivity, as well as

proficiency, but in more specialized discourse on management, they are used in quite

different senses. For instance, to put it simply, “efficiency is doing things right, and

effectiveness is doing the right things.”

80
 According to Education Analyst Anuj (2011) “Organisation Efficiency is a matter of

having the right people, doing the right job, within an optimal performance environment”. In

line with this argument, he refers to management education as a key factor in attaining the

organization’s goals.

Weber (1968), studying organizational analysis, proposes that a system of explicit

rules and division of labour is the best way in developing organizations. In his view, an

ideally efficient organization model is bureaucratic, impersonal and goal-oriented.

Akinsolu (2007) states that like all other organizations, all management decisions and

actions are founded on participations of the implicit or explicit assumptions and expectations

of the participants regarding the organizations’ behavior. He emphasizes on the educational

organizations’ effective teamwork and collaboration as the main foundation to have an

efficient organization.

In her doctoral thesis, entitled “Essays on University Efficiency Analysis and

Entrepreneurship among University Graduates”, Daghbashyanm (2013) states there is a

complementary relationship between efficiency of resource utilization in teaching and in

research; the efficiency of the universities are influenced by the source of funding, the size of

the higher educational institutes, the number of students in each faculty, and the faculties and

the students compositions; and there is no relationship between the efficiency and the

country, rather the efficiency is affected by organizational differences.

The effectiveness level of an educational organization as one of the most important

social institutions in all societies requires “adequate organizational formation, satisfactory

sources, consistent policies based on scientific and technological developments and qualified

employee with healthy working condition.” (Celep, 2000, p. 82). To meet these ends, the

teachers must be efficient, and the working conditions motivating the teachers is determining
81
in this efficiency. The employees’ level of organizational commitment is among the primary

factors constructing the employees’ interest toward their working environment (p. 83)

On the drive on efficiency in higher educations, March, a professor of organizational

behavior and decision-making in the Stanford schools of education and business, complains

of the increasing pressures on higher education to follow the efficiency methods pervasive in

business. He argues that “institutions of higher learning cannot be wholly justified by their

production of goods and services or their distribution of knowledge. They exist to glorify and

sustain a vision of human potential." (Cited in Stanford University News Service, 1995).

Ware and Kitsantas (2007) allude to teachers’ commitment as a direct reflection of the

type of leadership of the organization.

3.5 Organizational Commitment

Different definitions can be found for organizational commitment in the related literature,

many of which have been outlined in chapter one of this study. The Business Dictionary

(2013), d e f i n e s organizational commitment as “Strength of the feeling of responsibility

that an employee has towards the mission of the organization”.

Organizational commitment has an outstanding place in the study of organizational

behavior as the findings of a great deal of researches have endorsed the relationships between

organizational commitment and the organizational behaviors in the workplace (Porter et al.,

1974).

Becker (1960) introduces the “exchanged-based definition” or "side-bet" theory of

organizational commitment. The theory declares that individuals, regardless of the stressful

conditions they may undergo, are committed to the organization as far as they hold their

positions; however, if they are given an alternative benefit, they may be willing to leave the

organization.

82
 Porter et al. (1974) describe organisational commitment as “an attachment to the

organisation, characterised by an intention to remain in it; an identification with the values

and goals of the organisation; and a willingness to exert extra effort on its behalf” (p. 604).

O’Reilly (1989, p. 17) describes organizational commitment as, “an individual's

psychological bond to the organisation, including a sense of job involvement, loyalty and

belief in the values of the organisation”.

Meyer, Allen, and Smith (1993) declare that the three types of commitment,

normative, continuance and emotive commitments, are a psychological state, determining the

employees’ relationship with the organizations or whether the employees will stay with the

organizations.

According to Balay (2000, p.15), organizational commitment is a feeling of bond and

attachment which links the employees and the organizations and unite them around a

common value and goal.

Cohen (2003) holds that “commitment is a force that binds an individual to a course

of action of relevance to one or more targets” (p. xi). Cohen’s general description of

commitment pertains to relates to the definition of organizational commitment proposed by

Arnold (2005) as “the relative strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement

in an organisation” (p.625).

According to Batemen and Strasser (1984) organizational commitment must be

studied for its relationship with the effectiveness of the employees’ behaviors and

performance; with the employees’ attitudinal and affective issues such as job satisfaction; the

employees’ job and role characteristics; as well as the personal characteristics of the

employees such as age, and job tenure” (p. 95-96).

83
3.5.1 Dimensions of organizational commitment

Early definitions of organisational commitment introduce the concept as a single dimension,

cantered on an attitudinal dimension, involving identification, involvement, and loyalty of the

employees with and toward the organization (Porter et al., 1974).

Cohen (2003) refers to the concept of organisational commitment’s development in

the literature on industrial and organisational psychology.

Porter et al. (1974) define commitment based on identification and involvement of the

employees with the organization, suggesting that commitment is caused by accepting the

goals and values of organizations; the tendency to cooperate with the organization to fulfil its

goals, and the tendency to stay with the organization. Porter et al. are hence considering

organization as a uni-dimensional concept based on the emotive commitment.

Mowday (1998) declares that recent scholars modified the common perception of

organizational commitment as a uni-dimensional concept to a deeper understanding of

organizational commitment as a multi-dimensional concept (p. 389-390).

In their early definition, Meyer and Allen (1984) define organizational commitment as

a two-dimensional concept, including affective and continuance commitment; affective

commitment refers to the employees’ identification with and attachment to the organization

while the continuance commitment is the employees’ feeling to be committed to the

organization due to the cost they have to pay for leaving the organization. Later, Allen and

Meyer (1990) refine their model into a three-dimensional model by adding a new third

dimension of normative commitment which is the employees’ sense of obligation to stay in

an organization. In this type of commitment, the employees figure their staying and working

in the organization as their duty and responsibility.

84
 As cited in Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) what is common in all above definitions is

that commitment is defined as a psychological status that indicates the relationship between

organization and their personnel, and implies the employees’ decision to stay in or leave an

organization (p. 305).

Solinger, Van Olffen, and Roe (2007) conducted a critical conceptual analysis of the

three- dimensional model of organizational commitment (TCM) introduced by Meyer and

Allen (1991, 1997). They utilized the attitude-behavior model by Eagly and Chaiken (1993),

and concluded that “three-component model combines fundamentally different attitudinal

phenomena.” They propose that general organizational commitment must be considered only

as an affective commitment showing the attitude towards an object, namely the organization,

while the normative and continuance commitment reveals the attitudes towards specific

forms of behavior, namely, staying or leaving the organization, which may or may not be the

result of the affective bond with the organization.

3.5.2 Different models of organizational commitment

3.5.2.1 Kanter’s model (1972)

Kanter (1972) distinguishes three dimensions of commitment in terms of their action, that is,

Instrumental Commitment, Affective Commitment, and Moral Commitment. The

Instrumental dimension of commitment is related to the advantages and benefits of the

financial conditions of membership in a social group. The Affective dimension includes the

feeling of attachment and bonds and the satisfaction of interacting with others that attach the

individuals to the group. In its Moral dimension, commitment implies those conditions that

help the employees to enjoy a sense of self-esteem, self-confidence, social proud, and belief

in the values and goals of the organization of which they are a member.

85
 3.5.2.2 Steers’ model (1977)

This model states that organizational commitment can be simultaneously an independent and

a dependent variable. As an independent variable, organizational commitment can influence

other dependent variables such as the employees’ presence, turnover, tendency to turnover,

and their job performance while as a dependent variable it can be affected by other

independent variables such as personal characteristics, professional characteristics, and

professional experiences. This model is explained in more details in Figure 3.1, below.

Figure 3.1. Organizational Commitment Model (Steers, 1977, p. 52)

Personal Characteristics

1. The need to improve

2. Age
3. Education

Outcomes

1. Desire to remain
Job Characteristics
2. Intent to remain
Organizational Commitment
1. Duty identity 3. Job Attendance
2. Interaction Freedom 4. Job Performance
3. Feedbacks

Dependent Variable

Work Experience

1. Employees’ Attitude
2. Organizational Attachment
3. Personal Importance

Independent Variable

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

86
3.5.2.3 Angle and Perry’s model (1981)

Angle and Perry’s model of organizational commitment includes two dimensions of Value

Commitment and Continuous Commitment. Value commitment shows a positive tendency

toward the organization. This type of commitment alludes to the psychological and affective

commitment. The continuance commitment, the commitment to stay with the organization,

indicates the importance of interactions, rewards, and the inseparable interactions in an

economic exchange (Cited in Mayer and Schoorman, 1998, pp.15-16).

3.5.2.4 O’reilly and Chatman’s model (1986)

O’reilly and Chatman’s multi-dimensional model, including Instrumental Commitment

(Compliance), Normative Commitment (Internalization and Identification), presupposes that

commitment gives a special approach and attitude toward the organization, and has a

mechanism through which this approach can be shaped. O’reilly and Chatman, Based on

Kelaman (1958)’s view, believe that the relationship between the individual and the

organization can take the three forms of Compliance, Identification and Internalization.

Compliance is rather an expectation to obtain specific rewards from organizations than

emotional engagement. Identification takes place when the individual accepts this influence

to establish or maintain a satisfying relationship (Cited in Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001, p.

305) and finally, internalization is a behavior reflecting the values and goals when personal

and organizational values are similar (Mowday, 1998, p. 390).

These two scholars later merge Identification and Internalization into one type of

commitment, namely normative commitment. They noticed that compliance is in a

direct positive relationship with turnover.

87
3.5.2.5 Penley and Gould’s model (1988)

Penley and Gould propose a multi-dimensional framework. They distinguish three types of

commitments, namely, Moral Commitment, Calculative Commitment, and Alienative

Commitment. The definition they suggest for Moral commitment is very much similar to

Allen and Meyer’s Affective commitment, and Angle and Perry and Mayer and Schoorman’s

Value Commitment.

Their use of Calculative Commitment is congruent with Compliance introduced in

O’reilly and Chatman’s model, and can be even considered as a form of motivation instead of

commitment. Finally, Alienative Commitment is to some extent consistent with Continuance

Commitment proposed by Allen and Meyer (Cited in Meyer and Herescovich, 2001, p. 307).

3.5.2.6 Mathieu and Zajac’s model (1990)

Mathieu and Zajac analyze the variables affecting organizational commitment, and also those

variables which are affected by organizational commitment. They also study the relationship

of organizational variables with some other variables. The model is shown in Figure 3.2,

below.

88
 Figure 3.2. Organizational Commitment Model (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990, p.174)

Personal Characteristics Group/leader Relation Role States Consequences of Job Performance

- Age - Group Cohesiveness -Emotive Correlations

- Job Involvement - Other’s Rating
- Gender - Task Interdependence - Stress - Output Measure
- Education - Leader initiating -Occupational Commitment -Perceived Job alternatives
- Marital Status structure - Union Commitment
- Turnover
- Position Tenure - Leader Consideration - Intrinsic Job Satisfaction
- Extrinsic Job Satisfaction - Attendance
- Perceived Personal - Leader Communication - Supervision - Lateness
Competence - Participative Leadership - Pay and Promotion
- Ability - Work itself
Organization Characteristics - Co-workers
- Salary

- Organization Size
Job Characteristics
- Organization Centralization
-Skill Variety - Role Ambiguity
Organizational
-Task Autonomy -Role Conflict
- Role Overload Commitment
- Challenge
-Job Scope

Independent Organizational commitment Independent

Variable Variable
Independent Variable

3.5.2.7 Alen and Meyer’s model (1990)

Allen and Meyer base their three-dimensional model of organizational commitment on

observation they made of the similarities and differences present in uni-dimensional concepts

of organizational commitment. Totally, their argument suggests that commitment attaches the

individual to the organization and therefore, this attachment decreases the possibility of

turnover. In this model, organizational commitment is constructed based on the three

dimensions of Affective, Continuance, and Normative commitment. This model is shown in

Figure 3.3, below.

89
 Figure 3.3. Three-dimensional Model of Organizational Commitment (Allen and Meyer,

1990, p. 12)

Organizational
Commitment

Job
Work Experience Affective
Structure Characteristics
- Comfort Commitmentaff
Characteristics
- Competence

Personal
Characteristics

Continuance Turnovers
Investment/Side Bets
Alternatives Commitment

Socialization
- Cultural/Familial
- Organizational
On-The-Job Behaviors
Normative -Performance
Organizational Investment Commitment -Absenteeism
(Supports) - Transferability

Reciprocity Norms
Reciprocating the supports
and investment of the
organization

3.5.2.8 Jaros et al.’s model (1993)

Jaros et al. (1993) consider three types of commitment: Affective Commitment, Moral

Commitment, and Continuance Commitment. Affective Commitment is based on the

concrete experienced feeling of the personnel. Moral Commitment is almost congruous with

90
the Affective Commitment in Allen and Meyer’s model. Jaros et al. and Allen and Meyer’s

concept of Continuance Commitment are completely identical.

3.5.2.9 Mayer and Schoorman’s model (1998)

According to Mayer and Schoorman, organizational commitment has two dimensions; they

call these two dimensions Continuance Commitment (the tendency to stay with the

organization), and Value Commitment (the tendency to double-effort). Although there are

some similarities between the models proposed by Mayer and Schoorman and Angle and

Perry on one hand and the one suggested by Allen and Meyer on the other hand, there is one

fundamental difference between them. The three dimensions of Allen and Meyer’s

organizational commitment model are basically different based on the employees’ mind state

which attaches them to the organization; all the three commitments in Allen and Meyer’s

model lead to the behavioral outcome of staying in the organization and continuing the work.

Contrarily, in Angle and Perry’s and Mayer and Schoorman’s models, it is hypothesized that

Continuance Commitment relates to the decision and intention to stay with or leave the

organization, while Value Commitment is associated with double effort to achieve the

organizational goals.

It is noteworthy that based on Eskandaricharati (2013), Allen and Meyer’s three

dimensional organizational commitment model was proved to be the most effective.

Eskandaricharati (2013) implements a comprehensive study where different

definitions of organizational commitment, their differences and similarities, the antecedents

of organizational commitment, and different dimensions of organizational commitment have

been investigated and analyzed. Based on the theoretical frameworks of different models

under study, different dimensions of organizational commitment have been compared in

search of the concluding answers to the research questions of the study.

91
 It was finally concluded that Allen and Meyer’s three-dimension model is much more

comprehensive compared to the models introduces by many other scholars of behavioral and

organizational sciences.

3.6 Different Scholars’ Opinions on the Antecedents of Organizational

Commitment

3.6.1 Antecedents of organizational commitment in Mowday et al.’s view (1982)

Mowdae et al. (1982) classify the antecedents of Affective Organizational Commitment into

following four groups:

1. Personal characteristics: Personal characteristics include age, gender, tenure, and

other personal features. Their study shows that there is a significant direct relationship

between the two features of age and tenure on one hand and commitment on the other

hand.

The study by March and Simon (1958) also confirms the existence of such

relationship; in their conclusion they remark that as the age and the tenure of the

employees increase, their alternative job opportunities decrease, and this limitation

may increase the popularity of the organization’s present employers and

administrators. Contrary to age and tenure, level of education has an inverse

relationship with commitment, which may be caused by the organization’s failure in

fulfilling the expectations of highly educated employees.

Concerning the question of the relationship between the gender of the

employees and their organizational commitment, posed by Mowday et al. (1982),

Angle and Perry (1981) have found women more committed than men.

92
 Grusky (1966), claims that membership in the organization is much more

important to women, because to be successful, women have to overcome more

obstacles compared to men.

2. Role-related characteristics: The second group of the effective factors on

organizational commitment is the role of the employees and their job characteristics.

There are three aspects of job-role that has a potential effect on the employees’

commitment: job scope or job challenge; role ambiguity; and role conflict.

3. Structural characteristics: The first study on this concept has been done by Steers

(1977). He analyzes four structural variables which determine the structural

characteristics. The variables include the size of the organization, the scope of

supervision, centralization, and job cohesion.

4. Work experience: An employee earns job experience during his or her professional

life. This experience is considered as a fundamental factor in the process of

socialization, and this socialization is in turn influencing the affective attachment of

the employee to the organization. Buchanon (1974) claims when employees feel they

are necessary for the organizations or the organizational goals or commissions, they

will feel more committed to the organization.

3.6.2 Antecedents of commitment in Allen and Meyer’s view (1990)

Allen and Meyer (1990) define the antecedents of commitment for each three dimension as

follows:

Antecedents of affective commitment include participation, job challenge, role clarity,

goal clarity, goal difficulty, management receptiveness, peer cohesion, dependability, equity,

personal importance, and feedback.

All the above variables are embedded in work experience and are divided into:

93
 1. Those variables which provide the employees’ need to the feeling of physical and

psychological comfort; these variables are correlated with commitment and include

confirmation of expectations, equity in reward distribution, organizational

dependability, organizational support, role clarity, leadership style, and getting rid of

conflict.

2. The variables that help the employees’ feeling of competency are autonomy, fairness

of performance-based-rewards, job challenge, job scope, opportunity for advancement

and job promotion, participation in decision-making, and personal importance to the

organization.

Antecedents of continuance commitment include the amount of the investment of the

employee in the organization which encompasses skill, training, changing location of the

domicile, and personal investment on one hand and conceiving the possibility of other job

alternatives on the other hand

The amount of the employees’ personal investment refers to that energy and time the

employees spend to learn the particular approaches and skills which are not transferable to

other organizations. The employees’ conceiving the lack of job opportunities outside the

organization has the most significant relationship with Organizational Commitment (Allen

and Meyer, 1990, p. 1-18).

Antecedents of normative commitment consist of the employees’ experience before

entering the organization (labelled as Familial/Cultural Socialization) and the employees’

experiences after entering the organization (labelled as Organizational Socialization).

Religious beliefs, job consciousness, and intimate inter-group relationship lead to

psychological attachment, the employees’ feeling of involvement with the organization, and

also their socialization. On the other hand, normative commitment may also develop when

the organization gives the employees rewards in advance. Recognizing these investments of

94
the organization may cause an unbalanced situation in the employee-organization relationship

which forces the employees to reciprocate through being committed to the organization till

the debt is repaid (Meyer and Allen, 1991, pp.22-69).

3.6.3 Antecedents of organizational commitment in Mathieu’s view (1991)

Mathieu (1991, p.607) differentiates four different categories as the antecedents to

organizational commitment and job satisfaction, as follows:

1. Job characteristics

2. Role state (role ambiguity, role conflict, and role overload)

3. Personal variables (success motivation, competence)

4. Group attributes (performance standard, coherence)

3.6.4 Antecedents of organizational commitment in Mayer and Schoorman and March

and Simon’s views (1998)

Mayer and Schoorman (1998) and March and Simon (1958) studied the antecedents of

organizational commitment. Their study shows that:

1. Tenure has more significant positive correlation with Continuance

Commitment rather than value Commitment.

2. Retirement allowance has more significant positive correlation with Continuance

Commitment rather than Value Commitment.

3. Age has more significant correlation with Continuance Commitment rather than

Value Commitment.

4. Education has more negative correlation with Continuance Commitment rather than

Value Commitment.

5. Participation has more significant positive correlation with Value Commitment rather

than Continuance Commitment.

95
 6. Job prestige has more significant positive correlation with Value Commitment rather

than Continuance Commitment.

7. Job involvement has more significant positive correlation with Value Commitment

rather than Continuance Commitment.

8. Role ambiguity has more significant positive correlation with Value Commitment

rather than Continuance Commitment.

3.7 Approaches to Developing Organizational Commitment

Different studies show that in organizational behaviours and maintaining human resources,

the expression “Organizational Commitment” is important as a general discovery of more

experiences in the organizational environment. This concept expresses the approach to people

and their work in organizations.

O' Reilly (1989, p 20) explains that “to understand what commitment is and how it

is developed, is by understanding the underlying psychology of commitment so that we can

think about how to design systems to develop such an attachment among employees”;

therefore, to manage commitment, he states that organizations must first understand

commitment. O'Reilly then suggests three stages for development of organizational

commitments as follows:

1. Compliance Stage: Compliance stage refers to employees’ admitting to the influence

of others and the benefit they can take from others in the form of remuneration or

promotion. It complies with the continuance dimension of organizational

commitment.

2. Identification Stage: Through the identification stage, the employees admit the

influence to preserve a satisfying self-defining relationship with the organization as it

96
 gives them identity. It complies with the normative dimension of organizational

commitment.

3. Internalization Stage: This last stage in developing organizational commitment is

established when the employees find that the values of the organization is in line with their

values. It complies with the affective dimension of organizational commitment.

Arnold (2005) warns that the traditional way to develop organizational commitment

through providing j o b security and promotions is losing its effect in many organizations.

Ashraf et al. (2012) hypothesize that there is a positive correlation between goal

setting in the organizations and enhancing the employees’ engagement at work place. This

engagement will also develop the optimistic behavior of employees which in turn will

increase their organizational commitment.

Bashir and Ramay (2008) investigated career opportunities, work life policies, and job

characteristics among the most determining variables of organizational commitment of the IT

professionals in Pakistan. Their study confirms that IT professionals are looking for the

career opportunities which provide them with the chances to grow in organizational and

professional hierarchy; and the work-life conflict have disturbed the life of many employees;

but the third variable, job characteristic, was proved not to have any relationship with

organizational commitment.

Dessler (1980) explains eight steps for creating and developing organizational

commitment in employees. They include:

1. People-first values: It means the organization, from beginning, must hire those people

who have the organization’s desired values. This selection can be implemented through

conducting different interviews.

97
2. Two-way communication: It insists that managers and employees should enjoy a close

communication which provides the employees with the opportunity to freely express

their opinions, and inspires non-biased and fair behavior; though these measures are not

enough and final, they are necessary to start with.

3. Communion: It refers to the homogenization of employees based on the values, goals,

skills, and sifting those who are not homogeneous; it can be done through forming small

working teams; motivating employees by job rotation; and applying a religious or ritual

incentive.

4. Safety or security: Safety and security are in close relationship with organizational

commitment of the employees. Security has different economic, social, affective, and

psychological dimensions.

5. Transcendental meditation: It points that employees need some values to believe in, and

a sense of mission to be committed to.

6. Value-based hiring: It means not sheer emphasis on skills, but also consideration of

personal values in the process of hiring as the values and experiences of the individual

being consistent with the needs of the organization.

7. Hard-side reward practicing: It means giving rewards such as gifts, loans, and

providing some facilities in due occasions, beside other soft types, which motivate the

employees.

8. Actualizing: Actualizing is the final step which is built on the above seven steps that

facilitate employees’ actualizing what they can be.

To conclude, he reminds that commitment at different levels may have both negative and

positive outcomes for, and effect on the employees and organizations. Therefore, managers

and others in charge cannot all at once provide all the conditions and requirements to

develop Organizational Commitment in all employees. Based on the status and strategy of

98
the organization, however, some of the above arrangement can be adopted to apply the

desired discipline and control to the organization.

3.8 Different Levels of Commitment

There are different levels of individuals commitment based on development of the different

stages of commitment in individuals. Roughly the levels of commitment may be divided into

the three levels of higher, moderate, and lower levels of commitment which are elaborated

on below:

1. Higher level of commitment: According to Reichers (1985), high level of

organizational commitment implies a strong acceptance of the organization’s goals

and values and the tendency to attempt to stay with the organization.

2. Moderate level of commitment: The moderate or partial level of organizational

commitment implies a rather reasonable acceptance of organizational goals and values

and the tendency to attempt to stay with the organization.

3. Lower level of commitment: The low level of organizational commitment implies the

lack of acceptance of organizational goals and values, and the reluctance to attempt to

stay with the organization.

Blau and Boal (1987) examined insurance workers and concluded that employees with higher

level of organizational commitment are those with less absenteeism and turnover.

Porter et al. (1974) report that the employees with lower levels of commitment are

more likely to leave their counterparts. Meyer and Allen (1997) also argue that those

employees that have better relationship with their immediate work group have higher levels

of commitment to the whole organization. Meyer et al. (1993) found a positive relationship

between the employees’ age, and the time they spend with the organization on one hand and

the level of their organizational commitment.

99
 3.9 The Positive and Negative Outcomes of Commitment

Lowman (1993, pp. 65-140) explains the features of over-commitment and under-

commitment. He introduces fear of success; fear of failure; chronic and persistent

procrastination; negative cultural, familial, and personality factors; and chronic and persistent

under-achievement as the features of under-commitment and over loyalty; job burnout;

obsessive-compulsive patterns at work place; neurotic compulsion to success; and extreme

level of energy as the features of over-commitment.

According to Alizadeh (1994) different levels and dimensions of commitment have

different positive and negative outcomes for the organizations, some of which are discussed

below:

3.9.1 The positive outcomes of commitment at different levels

Organizational commitment at different levels may have positive outcomes both for the

employees and the organizations.

3.9.1.1 The positive outcomes of low-level commitment for employees

Low level of commitment can have positive outcomes because it may facilitate creativity and

innovation. In an environment of conflict and uncertainty, the employees with lower level of

commitment can improve their power of creativity. Lacking a high level of commitment,

employees may search for other alternative solutions which will make more efficient use of

human resources.

3.9.1.2 The positive outcomes of low-level commitment for organizations

The less-committed employees’ turnover and absenteeism may have positive outcomes for

the organization, because on one hand it decreases the negative effects of low-level of

commitment on other employees, and on the other hand makes it possible for others with new

100
skills to join the organization. Moreover, the less-committed employees can criticize the

organization more openly which will improve the organization in long run.

3.9.1.3 The positive outcomes of average-level commitment for employees

At this level of commitment, employees accept the basic values and norms of the

organizations, but reject the unnecessary and disadvantageous values; this way they can keep

their identity as a human being.

3.9.1.4 The positive outcomes of average- level commitment for organizations

The sense of responsibility and loyalty of the employees have many organizational benefits.

Its positive outcomes for the employees and accordingly for the organizations include:

continuance of the employees’ working, less tendency to turnover, and more job satisfaction.

3.9.1.5 The positive outcomes of high-level commitment for employees

In this situation, employees, in spite of high external pressures, are very devoted to the

organization. High-level of commitment keeps the members enthusiastic and excited.

3.9.1.6 The positive outcomes of high-level of commitment for organizations

Committed employees bring stability and security to the organization which is an inevitable

necessity to some organizations. In this situation, the organization will be ensured of the

high-level performance of the employees and accurate and full implementation of the rules.

3.9.2 The negative outcomes of organizational commitment at different levels

Organizational commitment at different levels may have negative outcomes both for the

employees and the organizations.

3.9.2.1 The negative outcomes of low-level commitment for employees

Without proving their commitment, employees cannot be promoted to higher levels. Critics

101
of the organization may cause difficult problems for the organization and themselves; among

their problems are losing their salary and their safety, and being deprived of professional

advantages and benefits.

According to Celep (2000) lower commitment affects the effectiveness of both the

school and teachers in their performance and causes them to leave their profession. “The less

committed teachers may both create difficulties and cause the deviations in respect of the

educational aims of the school” through encouraging the students to follow the values and

goals different from the goals and values of the school.

3.9.2.2 The negative outcomes of average-level commitment for employees

Alizadeh (1994) argues that the negative outcomes awaiting the employees with an average-

level of commitment may include limitation in job opportunities and job promotion, and

problems in contiguity of these employees with the commitments fitting their level.

3.9.2.3 The negative outcomes of average-level commitment for organizations

Limitation of the activities which are out of the scope of organizational responsibilities, less

possibility of balancing the professional expectations and non-professional ones, and

decrease in the efficiency of the organization’s performance are among the disadvantages of

employees’ average-level of commitment for the organizations.

3.9.2.4 The negative outcomes of high-level of commitment for employees

The negative outcomes of high-level of commitment for employees can include limitation of

the opportunity for growth and creativity, and lead to resistance before changes (pp.64-67).

Durkheim (1895) warns about the dangers of high-level of commitment to the

organizations. He reminds that paying no attention to people’s personality and identity may

lead to suicide. Among other consequences of high-level of organizational commitment for

102
employees can be disturbance in family relation (due to the employees’ dedicating all their

time and energy to the organizations); tension in interactions; loss of the feeling of identity

and the ability to interact with others due to spending all the energy in work and restriction in

non-professional relations.

3.9.2.5 The negative outcomes of high-level commitment for organizations

Alizadeh (1994) states that the employees’ high-level of commitment may decrease the

organizations’ flexibility to improve because of their wrong trusts in the policies and

procedures of the organization. Employees may also commit immoral or illegal works for the

sake of the organization, and finally they may violate public interest, ethical codes, and social

rules when they are entangled in a situation to choose between the former and the

organization’s interest (p. 67).

3.10 Summary
The chapter started with an introduction followed by definitions of the term organization in

different ways. Different characteristics of organizations in general and educational

organizations in particular have been explained. Then, University as an educational

organization as well as the efficiency of educational organizations have been discussed. The

concept of organizational commitment, its dimensions, as well as different models of

organizational commitment have been elaborated on. Antecedents of organizational

commitment in different scholars’ views were also included. Different stages in developing

the organizational commitment were determined and to wind up, different levels of

commitment along with their positive and negative outcomes both for the employees and the

organizations have been added.

103
References

Akinsolu, O. A. (2007). Teams and the dynamics of collaboration: An antidote for

educational. The Organization Collection. Retrieved from http: // ijm. cgpublisher.

Com/product/pub.28/prod.669

Alizadeh, M. (1994). [An analysis of the dimensions of organizational commitment and their

relationship with performance of the supervising centers of Mellat Banks]. Esfahan.

Tehran: Management Department.

Allen, A. L. (1958). Management and organization. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Allen, N. J., andMeyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective,

continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of

Occupational Psychology, 63, 1–18.

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

commitment and organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26,

1-14.

Arnold, J. 2005. Work psychology: Understanding human behaviour in the workplace, 4th

edition. London: Prentice Hall Financial Times.

Ashraf, Z., Jaffri, A. M., Sharif, M. T., and Asif Khan, M. (2012). Increasing employee

organizational commitment by correlating goal setting, employee engagement and

optimism at workplace. European Journal of Business and Management, 4(2), 71-77.

Retrieved from www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBM/article/download/1036/956

Balay, R. (2000). O ¨ zel ve Resmi Liselerde Yo¨ netici veO ¨ g˘ retmenlerinO ¨ rgu¨ tsel

Bag˘lilig˘ i: Ankara Ili O ¨ rneg˘ i [Organizational Commitment of Administrators and

104
 Teachers in Private and Public Secondary Schools: Ankara Sample] (Doctoral

dissertation). Ankara: Ankara University.

Bashir, S., and Ramay, M. I. (2008). Determinants of organizational commitment: A study of

information technology professionals in Pakistan. Institute of Behavioral and Applied

Management, 226-238.

Bateman, T., and Strasser, S. (1984). A longitudinal analysis of the antecedents of

organizational commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 95-112.

Becker, H. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of Sociology, 66,

32-40.

Blau, G., and Boal, K. (1987). Using job involvement and organizational commitment

interactively to predict turnover. Journal of Management, 15, 1, 115-127

Buchanan, B. (1974). Building organizational commitment: The socialization of managers

in work organizations. Administer Science Quarterly, 19, 533-546.

Celep, Cevat. (2000). Teachers' organizational commitment in educational organizations.

National Forum of Teacher Education Journal,10E(3), 82-95.

Chelladurai, P. (2009). Managing organizations for sport and physical activity: A systems

perspective (3rd. ed.). Scottsdale, Arizona: Holcomb Hathaway.

Cohen, A. (2003). Multiple commitments in the workplace: An integrative approach.

Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum

Daghbashyan, Z. (2013). Essays on university efficiency analysis and entrepreneurship

among university graduates. (Doctoral dissertation). Stockholm: Department of

Industrial Economics and Management, Royal Institute of Technology. Retrieved

from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:581259/FULLTEXT02

Davis, k. (1977). Organizational behaviour: a book of reading. New York: McGraw-Hill.

105
Dessler, G. (1980). Organization theory–integrating structure and behavior. (2nd

ed.). . New York: Prentice Hall.

Durkheim, E. (1895). The Rules of Sociological Method. (S. A. Solovay, and J. Mueller,

Trans.) New York: The Free Press.

Education Analyst Anju. (2011). Impacts of proper management education in organizations.

Retrieved from http://www.articleseen.com/Article_Impacts-of-Proper-Management-

Education-in-Organizations_61415.aspx

Encyclopaedia of Business. (2010). Effectiveness and efficiency. Retrieved from

http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/De-Ele/Effectiveness-and-

Efficiency.html#b

Eskandaricharati, A. (2013). The Efficiency of Allen and Meyer’s model of organizational

commitment and its leading role in organizations compared to other models. Advances

in Environmental Biology, 7(14).

Fosterbook. (2010). Maximizing business performance. Retrieved from http://

www.fosterbrook.com/html/efficiency.html

Grusky, D. (1966). Career mobility and organizational commitment. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 10, 488-503.

Hall, R. H. (1977). Organization: Structure and process. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-

Hall.

Honari, H. (2004). The design and explanation of Information systems and productivity of

human resources in the physical education organization, sports federation elected and

olympic committee. (Doctoral dissertation). Tehran: University Of Tarbit Modares.

106
Jackson, S. E., Schuler, R. S., and Rivero, J. C. (1989). Organizational characteristics as

predictors of personnel practices. Personnel Psychology, 42(4), 727-786.

Jaros, S. J., Jermier, J. M., Koehler, J. W., and Sincich, T. (1993). Effects of continuance

affective and moral commitment on the withdrawal process: an evaluation of eight

structural equations models. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 951-995.

Jensen, S. H. (2010). The organisation of the university. EPOKE, Department of Education,

AarhusUniversity. Retrieved from http://edu.au.dk/fileadmin/www.dpu.dk/forskning/

forskningsprogrammer/epoke/workingpapers/WP_14.pdf

Johnson, R. (2013). The top 10 characteristics of healthy organization. Houston Chronicle.

Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/top-10-characteristics-healthy-

organization-20452.html

Jucevičienè, P., and Cesevičiütè, I. (2009). Characteristics of educational and learning

environments in organization and partnership network from innovation point of

view. Social Sciences/Socialiniai Mokslai, 63(1). Retrieved from http://info.smf.ktu.lt/

Edukin/zurnalas/archive/pdf/2009-1_(63)/7%20Juceviciene_Ceseviciute.pdf

Kanter, R. M. (1972). Commitment and community: communes and utopias in sociological

perspective. Harvard University Press.

Katz, J., and Gartner, W. B. (1988). Properties of emerging organizations. Academy of

Management Review, 13 (3), 429-441. Retrieved from http://amr.aom.org/conte

nt/13/3/429.short

Lowman, R. L. (1993). Counseling and psychotherapy of work dysfunctions. Washington,

D.C.: American Psychological Association.

107
March, J. G., and Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.

Mathieu, J. E. (1991). A cross level nonrecursive model of the antecedents of organizational

commitment and satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 607-618.

Mathieu, J., and Zajac, D. (1990). A review of meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates

and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2),

171-94.

Mayer, R. C., and Schoorman, F. D. (1998). Differentiating antecedents of

organizational commitment: a test of March and Simon’s model. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 19,15-28.

Meyer, J. P., and Allen, N. J. (1984). Testing the “side-bet theory” of organizational

commitment: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology,

69, 372–378

Meyer, J. P., and Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational

commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61- 89.

Meyer, J. P., and Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and

Application. Thousand Oaks, Canada: Sage Publications.

Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., and Smith, C. (1993). Commitment to organizations and

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

Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.

Meyer, J. P., and Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general

model. Human Resource Management Review, 11(3), 299-326.

108
Morye, P. (2012). Definition, meaning and characteristics of organisation. Retrieved from

http://www.publishyourarticles.net/knowledge-hub/business-studies/organisation.html

Mowday, R. T. (1998). Reflections on the study and relevance of organizational

commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 8(4), 387-401.

Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., and Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organizational

linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York:

Academic Press.

Mueller, C. W., Wallace, J. E., and Price, J. L. (1992). Employee commitment: Resolving

some issues. Work and Occupations, 19, 211-236

O’Reilly, C. (1989). Corporations, culture and commitment: Motivation and social control in

organizations. California Management Review, 31(4); reprinted in Steers, R., and

Porter, L. (1991). Motivation and work behaviour, (5th ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.

O’Reilly, C., and Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological

attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on

prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499.

Penley, L. E., and Gould, S. (1988). Etzioni's model of organizational involvement: A

perspective for understanding commitment to organizations. Journal of

Organizational Behavaviour, 9, 43–59.

Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., and Boultian, P. V. (1974). Organizational

commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 59, 603–609.

109
Publish Your Articles. (2012). Definition, meaning and characteristic of organisation.

Retrieved from http://www.publishyourarticles.net/knowledge-hub/business-studies/o

rganisation. html

Reichers, A. E. (1985). A Review and reconceptualization of organizational commitment.

Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 465–476.

Robbins, S. P. (1996). Organizational behavior: Concepts, theories, applications. New Jersey:

Prentice-Hall.

Solinger, O. N., Van Olffen, W., and Roe, R. A. (2007). Beyond the three-component model

of organizational commitment. The Netherlands: Maastricht University, Retrieved

from http://arno.unimaas.nl/show.cgi?fid=8040.

Stanford University News Service. (1995). Too much efficiency not good for higher

education,March argues. Retrieved from http://news.stanford.edu/pr/95/950607

Arc5193.html

Steers, R. M. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 46-56.

Ware, H., and Kitsantas, A. (2007). Teacher and collective efficacy beliefs as predictors of

professional commitment. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(5), 303-31 0.

Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society: Part I and II (Fishoff et al. Trans.). Berkeley,

California: The University of California Press.

110