The Importance of Organisational Commitment - Essay Example

Organisational Commitment (the concept of commitment, why do you think organsational commitment is important). Introduction Organisational commitment involves studying the factors that help promote employee attitudes and behaviours through understanding the psychological links between the aspirations of an organisation and those of the employee. The aim is to ascertain those factors that lead to the development of employees who can be relied on to perform a task in a committed and responsible manner consistent with the goals of the organisation. This is thought to take place in three main ways: 1. Pride and support of the organisation's goals. 2. Long-term loyalty to, and commitment to stay with the organisation. 3. Motivation and behaviour beyond the normal call of duty. It should be noted that a person's attitude towards an organization can be explained from a traditional motivational standpoint. For example, individuals may be working to support an organization not due to any intrinsic dedication but rather because they are motivated by allegiance to professional standards. Correspondingly, an employee's long term satisfaction may be premised on the fact that the inducements and contributions are of just the right balance. It is what occurs when employees become dissatisfied or better opportunities come along, but the individual continues to remain with the company, where traditional theories fall down. Loyalty is therefore more than maintaining a relationship, it is maintaining this even when inducements come along that threaten this affiliation. It is vitally important for human resource management that the factors leading to such loyalty be identified so employee satisfaction can be more effectively targeted and co-ordinated. A satisfied workforce will therefore encourage both a more productive outcome for a company as well as cutting the cost of finding replacements. General Theories and Empirical Studies Researchers have attempted to analyse the probable underlying mechanisms leading to positive commitment by way of a number of different theories based upon how human motivation is realised. The human resources view had initially been that satisfied employees would automatically achieve a high level of performance. Subsequent empirical research, however, found this not to be the case. In fact, the data sometimes showed positive, sometimes negative, or even no correlation between the competing factors (Vroom 1964). Various authors have therefore stressed that there is little point in relating overall job satisfaction to a general index of performance. Over the past decades researchers have been, with varying degrees of success, examining organisational commitment from a number of empirical and theoretical perspectives in an effort to tease out more precisely the likely causal factors. One such approach was Herzberg's 'Two-Factor Theory' (Herzberg et al 1959). This theory is based on Maslow's 'hierarchy of needs' (Maslow 1954; McGregor 1960), which emphasised the importance of satisfying basic physical needs before higher more abstract ones could be met. The notion of a lower level of need having first to be met, however, was shown to be not always the case and the theory did not take into account a whole range of variables such as personality traits, skill level etc., (Pinder 1984). Herzberg recast Maslow's theory in what he termed 'general laws of job attitudes' concerning such things as achievement, recognition, responsibilities, promotion, prospects, and salary, which lead to feelings of 'self-actualisation'. Herzberg attempted to show how an employee's need is internally driven and, by understanding this, total commitment to the organization could be ensured and production levels thereby improved. As this theory is individualist in outlook and stems from a psychological/biological perspective, it takes a generalist stance linking the particular to the general (inductive) and was therefore deemed to be applicable to any situation. In this regard, it is held to apply across class, nation, culture and gender etc. However, this approach has been severely criticised, both because of its generalist outlook and due to the fact that, despite the claim that it applies to most circumstances, Herzberg later excluded certain groups as not relevant to the theory i.e. production and clerical workers (Holloway 1991). The theory, in the final analysis, fails because the findings were an artefact of his method - if dissatisfied the employee attributes this to the environment (extrinsic), if satisfied this is accounted for by oneself (intrinsic). More seriously, it did not take into account individual differences (Schneider 1985). Rather than simply relying on innate factors, Locke and Latham's (1984) 'Goal Setting' theory endeavours to take account of the values towards which an individual aspires e.g. concept of good/bad, moral beliefs, short-term preferences. Individuals develop goals according to these values that they attempt to put into practice. In the organizational setting, motivation to attain goals is attained when the goal is set high, is precisely formulated, there is regular feedback and the goal is accepted by all concerned. Assuming that the person is allowed a certain amount of flexibility, following these principles will lead to a motivated and well-adjusted workforce. As this is a cognitively-based theory, it sees values as having an important role by intervening between immediate reinforcements - such as pay and recognition - and performance, as part of a 'High Performance Cycle' (Locke and Latham 1990). This theory has been claimed by some to be one of the most valid and wide-reaching (Staw 1984) but is, nevertheless, liable to the criticism that, as a psychological explanation as to how behaviour occurs, does not provide a reason for the behaviour itself. In other words, the empirical fact that consciously set goals can influence performance does not provide an explanation for actual behaviour (Drenth et al 1998). Deci and Ryan (1985) take the view that there are two major factors leading to human motivational behaviour; the need to be seen as competent and the need to be in control of one's own activities. The 'Cognitive Evaluation Theory', as this approach is known by, stipulates that the relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is negative as opposed to positive. As a consequence, if a person receives an extrinsic financial reward, this will have the effect of working against any internally derived (intrinsic) factors. This generalist theory has been put to the test in a large number of empirical studies but there has been little support to back up its claims (Thierry 1990). In addition, the theory seems to lack logical consistency and some of its assumptions can be better explained by the cognitive dissonance approach (see below). Festinger (1954) argued that individuals have a tendency to seek out those who differ in outlook as little as possible from themselves - after which they make a comparison to the extent that, if this is positive, pleasure ensues but, if negative, dissonance arises that will act as a motivation to change behaviour. Moreover, a comparison involving opinions inspires an individual towards a similar view whereas a comparison relating to skill encourages a person to try just that little bit harder. Adam's translated these principles in the 'Equity Theory' which states that the degree of equity is determined by the ratio between one's own inequity in performance when this is compared with a significant other. If this relationship is found to be unequal, dissonance occurs, motivating the individual to restore the balance. A large number of empirical studies of this general theory found support in the case of a direct exchange relationship more than in an indirect relationship involving the intervention of a third party. In addition, consonance was found to be stronger in cases of underachieving than overachieving, suggesting that individuals do not strive for a precise or exact balance in outcomes but tend to be satisfied with partial elimination of dissonance (Syroit 1984). The practical applications of this theory have also not met with much success. Expectancy Theory, based on Vroom's (1964) research, has received substantial support and once held a dominant position in how motivation and commitment might arise in organizations. Two main principles are of importance in this theory; an expectancy that behaviour will lead to a particular outcome and the attractiveness of the outcome to the person. More specifically, motivation towards greater effort depends upon the extent to which the expectancy of greater effort will lead to a higher level of performance and on how attractive this higher performance is for the individual. Although some aspects of Expectancy Theory have been disputed, there has been much empirical support for its claims (see, for example, Eerde and Thierry 1996). It may be the fact that Goal Setting and Expectancy theories have reached similar conclusions because some of their general principles and approaches to the issues overlap (Ilgen and Klein 1989). This is probably not due to chance, as, out of all the theories so far considered, these seem to have engendered the most empirical support. However, despite some enduring and promising features arising from the two theories that have implications for organizational commitment, there is a need for greater refinement of the methods in order to take account of other important variables. For example, a person's estimation of their own behaviour, certain obstacles, chance factors and situational variables may influence performance and an employee may change his view about him/herself during a behavioural cycle etc., (Feather 1982; Mathieu, and Zajac 1990). Some evidence also points to the fact that the relationship between affective commitment to an organization may be moderated by both employee's level of financial reward and their career stage (Brett et al 1995; Cohen 1991). Such questions can only be resolved by further empirical research in workplace and lab settings that will help to pin-point the variables concerned and extend the scope of both Expectancy and Goal Setting theories. Meyer and Allen (1997) have attempted to take account of some of these shortfalls in their 'Three Component Model' of organizational commitment. This model was formulated precisely because there had been a growing concern that commitment was a multi-dimensional construct with little general agreement about what this implied. Their model is based upon three components; an affective (normative) orientation or emotional attachment to group. cost-based (continuance) factor where the profit associated with staying with an establishment is compared with costs of leaving with 'side-bets' associated with investment over time, and obligation of moral responsibility (normative) wherein a person's behaviour exceeds normal demands in that the person remains with a company regardless of status. Meyer and Allen (1997) conclude that affective commitment develops on the basis of individual rather than universal need to do with self-worth whereas continuance commitment develops as a function of the various investments made by employees and alternative employment opportunities the employee believes to exist. Normative commitment, on the other hand, probably depends on early socialisation that sets the general tone for beliefs and outlook towards others (Meyer et al 1993). The theory in general seems to have received more empirical corroboration on the first count (Cohen and Lowenberg 1990) somewhat more on the second and least on the third. Strategies and Methods Inconsistencies in the conceptualisation of measurement could interfere with understanding the commitment process. (Meyer and Allen 1991). Schwab (1980) recommended psychometric evaluation of measures used in this line of research, including an examination of reliability based on internal consistency and temporal stability. The Continuance Commitment Scale of Meyer and Allen (1989) has probably undergone the most extensive empirical validation. And many studies of organizational behaviour have used their Organizational Commitment Questionnaire that tests for this characteristic (Mowday et al 1979). In fact, the questionnaire seems to be the most widely used and reliable method for assessing commitment criteria (Drenth et al 1998). Others may also be employed, such as interviews, behavioural observations, clerical data (e.g. absenteeism rates), and critical incidents. No method is perfect, but where there is little information about employees an 'open' method, such as the interview, may be more appropriate. In using questionnaires it is crucial that the interviewee remains unaware of the intention of the survey, otherwise there will be a risk of bias occurring. There are basically three types of questionnaire with different scaling arrangements; simple evaluation, description, and weighted evaluation. Simple evaluation involves the presenting of a statement to a respondent who then chooses one of the response alternatives e.g. Question: 'My supervisor gets on well with his staff' with possible responses ranging from 'agree completely' to 'disagree completely'. This instrument has been used quite extensively e.g. 'Attitude Scale for Industrial Labour' (ASIA 1969); 'Questionnaire for Staff Management in Industry'; 'Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire' (Weiss et al 1967); and 'Survey of Organizations' (Taylor and Bowers 1972). With descriptive questionnaires, the respondent is required to determine the accuracy of descriptions of work by responding to a series of short phrases e.g. 'my work is useful', 'my pay is low' etc., otherwise known as the 'Job Description Index' (Smith et al 1985). This scale provides a good illustration of the social reference group theory, where the difference between what a person expects and what is experienced in relation to perceived real and potential alternatives in a given situation is assessed. Weighted evaluation involves those aspects of work to which a respondent relates that is compared with what the individual aspires to, finds positive or is important. The differences are then compared giving a discrepancy score. This method, however, has been found not to be dependable and most researchers have therefore tended to rely on the first two instruments. As these approaches look at particular facets of the work situation, they are not able to give a global rating of satisfaction. This problem has been partially offset by posing general questions such as ' how do you feel about your work as a whole' and the compiled answers to such questions averaged. This approach to gauging satisfaction, however, suffers from the flaw that it might include those factors that have little, if anything, to do with the work situation itself (Arvey and Dewhirst 1979). Conclusion Assessing organizational commitment has proved to be more difficult than was first assumed. The relationship between work satisfaction and performance has been found to be complex involving a number of socio-psychological variables. Early theories were unable to take account of such criteria due to the fact that they were based on simple theories which, thanks to numerous empirical studies, both in the laboratory and in field, have helped to identify the precise factors with greater accuracy. Expectancy and Goal Setting theories, as well as the Three Component Model, were found to be particularly productive in this respect having received a measure of empirical support. By combining the best of these different approaches, which are not mutually exclusive, it may be possible to come to an even better understanding as to what determines organizational commitment. Of all the techniques for testing commitment, structured questionnaires seemed to be the most widely used and tested with the Continuance Commitment Scale being particularly effective. Bibliography Arvey, R. D. and Dewhirst, H. D. 1979. Relationships between diversity of interests, age, job satisfaction and job performance. Journal of Occupational Psychology. 52, pp. 17-23. Brett, J. E., Cron, W. L. and Slocum, J. W. 1995. Economic dependency in work: A moderator for the relationship between organizational commitment and performance. Academy of Management Journal 38, pp. 261-271. Cohen, A. 1991. Career stage as a moderator for the relationships between organizational commitment and its outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Psychology. 64, pp. 253-268. Cohen, A. and Lowenberg, G. 1990. A re-examination of the side-bet theory as applied to organizational commitment: A meta-analysis. Human Relations. 43. pp. 1015-1050. Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M. 1985. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press. Drenth, J. D. Thierry, H. and Wolff, C. J. (eds). 1998. Handbook of Work and Organizational Psychology. Vol. 4. Hove: Psychology Press. Eerde, W. and Thierry, H. 1996. Vroom's expectancy model and work related criteria. Journal of Applied Psychology. 81, pp. 575-586. Feather, N. T. 1984. Expectancy-value approaches: Present status and future directions. In, N. T. Feathers (ed). Expectations and actions: Expectancy-value models in psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Festinger, L. 1954. A theory of social comparison. Human Relations. 7. pp. 117-140. Herzberg, F. Mausner, B. and Snyderman, B. B. 1959. The motivation to work. New York: Wiley. Holloway, 1991. Work Psychology and Organizational Behaviour. London: Sage. Ilgen, D. and Klein, H. J. 1989. Organizational Behavior. Annual Review of Psychology. 40, pp. 327-351. Locke, E. A. and Latham, G. P. 1984. Goal Setting: A motivational technique that works. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Locke, E. A. and Latham, G. P. 1990. Work motivation: The performance cycle. In, U. Klienbeck., H. H. Quast., H. Thierry. and H. Hcker (eds), Work motivation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Maslow, A. H. 1954. Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row. Mathieu, J. E. and Zajac, D. 1990. A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organisational commitment. Psychological Bulletin. 34. pp. 299-317. McGregor, D. C. 1960. The Human Scale of Enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. 1991. Testing the 'side-bet theory' of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology. 69, pp. 372-378. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. 1989. A three component conceptualisation of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 14, pp. 224-247. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. 1997. Commitment in the Workplace - Theory, Research and Application. London: Sage. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. and Smith, C. A. 1993. Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualisation. Journal of Applied Psychology. 78, pp. 538-551. Mowday, R. T. Steers, R. M. and Porter, C. W. 1979. The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 14. pp. 224-247. Pinder, C. C. 1984. Work motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman. Schwab, 1980. Construct validity in organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior. 2. pp. 3-43. Schneider, B. 1985. Organizational behavior. Annual Review of Psychology. 36, pp. 573-611. Smith, P. C. Kendall, L. M. and Hulin, C. L. 1985. The job description index. Bowling Green: Dept. of Psychology, Bowling Green State University. Syroit, J.E.M.M. 1984. Interpersonal justice: A psychological analysis illustrated with empirical results. Dissertation: Katholieke Universteit Brabant. Staw, B. 1984. Organizational Behavior: A review and reformulation of the field's outcome variables. Annual Review of Psychology. 35. pp. 627-666. Taylor, J. C. and Bowers, D. G. 1972. Survey of Organizations. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research. Thierry, H. 1990. Intrinsic motivation reconsidered. In, U. Klienbeck., H. H. Quast., H. Thierry. and H. Hcker (eds), Work motivation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Vroom. V. H. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York: Wiley. Weiss, D, J. Davis, R. V. England, G. W. and Lofquist, L. H. 1967. Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation. Bulletin 22. Read More