Perceived Organizational Support Reciprocation of Perceived Organizational Support 量化研究方法與應用 沈芯菱、李杭、黃慧珠、吳國偉、董建華 1st Nov, 2016

Outline Introduction Method Result Discussion Author Hypothesis Sample and Procedure Result Mediation Moderation Discussion Key Findings Limitations Conclusion

Email：reisenberger2@uh.edu Phone: (713) 743-3159 Author Robert Eisenberger Professor in the Psychology Department and in the Bauer School of Business at the University of Houston 1986〈Perceived Organizational Support〉 1987〈Reciprocation ideology 〉 1990〈POS and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation〉 1997〈POS, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction 〉 1998〈POS and police performance: The moderating influence of socioemotional needs 〉 1999〈POS: Inferior-versus-superior performance by wary employees 〉 2001〈Reciprocation of Perceived Organizational Support〉 Email：reisenberger2@uh.edu Phone: (713) 743-3159

Background Reciprocation of Perceived Organizational Support (Cited by 1839) Social Exchange Theory Reciprocity norm : Meeting obligations Organizational support theory “The POS strengthens affective commitment and performance by a reciprocation process.” →How? What’s the process?

Hypothesis Affective Commitment Exchange Ideology Organizational Spontaneity Felt Obligation Moderation H3 H1 H2 Mediation In-role Perform. POS Positive Mood H4 Mediation Withdrawal Behavior H1: POS will be positively related to employees’ felt obligation to care about the organization’s welfare and to help the organization reach its objectives. H2: The relationship between POS and felt obligation will increase with the strength of employee exchange ideology H3: Employees’ felt obligation to care about and aid the organization will mediate the relationship of POS with affective organizational commitment, organizational spontaneity, in-role performance, and withdrawal behavior. H4: Positive mood will mediate the relationships of POS with affective organizational commitment and organizational spontaneity. H1 H2 H3 H4

Method

Method Sample and Procedure

Method Sample and Procedure Trust Building up :Confidence notion to participants Social security # (pair responses 2/ supervisory evaluation) Target::430/450(92%)employees complete questionnaires 78% involve processing and handling mail directly 12% support staff 10% supervisors Gender:60%:40%= male:female Average Tenure= 10.8 years(SD=7.16) within1 week after employees completion survey (Me=9.8) Supervisors rate employees In-role performance organizational spontaneity Withdrawal behaviors

Method Sample and Procedure Trust Building up :Confidence notion to participants Social security # (pair responses 2/ supervisory evaluation) Target: Position:430/450(92%)employees complete questionnaires 78% involve processing and handling mail directly 12% support staff 10% supervisors Gender:60%:40%= male:female Average Tenure= 10.8 years(SD=7.16) within1 week after employees completion survey (Me=9.8) Supervisors rate employees In-role performance organizational spontaneity Withdrawal behaviors

Measure (N=413) 6.Performance Measurement 7-point Likert-Type Scale All loadings are sandartized 1.Perceived Organizational Support (POS) X6 items (#1-#6, w/1R) Eisenberger et. al , 1986 (w/reliability and validity) 2.Fell Obligation X7 items (#7-#13, w/1R) Measure employee’s felt obligation on organization 3.Employee exchange ideology X8 items (#14-#21, w/2R) Eisenberger et al, 1986 + 3 new items (reciprocity) 4.Affective organizational commitment X 5 items (#22-#27) Meyer and Allen’s Affective Commitment Scale + 1 (organizational Commitment Questionnaire) 5.Positive Mood Rate from 1-5 (1=very little) X2 items (#28-#29) Burke, Brief, George, Roberson, and Webster (1989) 6.Performance Measurement Supervisors evaluated worker w/5 points-scale (1=extremely characteristic) X12 items(#30-#41) X4 items~ in-role-job behaviors X4 items~ organizational spontaneous behaviors X4 items~ withdraw behaviors (w/all R) R=item reverse

Results

Bird view Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables Major variables Variables Results Control variables 2. Mediation Fully mediated model Paths 1. Modelling Partially mediated model 3. Moderation Discriminant validity of the constructs Centralization & Interaction Main effects partialing Standard HMR analysis Factor correlations Simple effects test

Remind: Model based on theories Exchange ideology Affective commitment Felt obligation Org. spontaneity POS In-role performance Positive mood Withdraw behavior

Modelling Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables Major variables Variables Results Control variables 2. Mediation Fully mediated model Paths 1. Modelling Partially mediated model 3. Moderation Discriminant validity of the constructs Centralization & Interaction Main effects partialing Standard HMR analysis Factor correlations Simple effects test

Discriminant validity of the constructs-1/2 Exchange ideology Affective commitment Felt obligation Org. spontaneity POS In-role performance Positive mood Withdraw behavior

Discriminant validity of the constructs-2/2 Absolute fitness Incremental fitness > 0.9 > 0.9 0.05~0.08

Modelling Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables Major variables Variables Results Control variables 2. Mediation Fully mediated model Paths 1. Modelling Partially mediated model 3. Moderation Discriminant validity of the constructs Centralization & Interaction Main effects partialing Standard HMR analysis Factor correlations Simple effects test

Model based on theories with “Tenure” Exchange ideology Affective commitment Felt obligation Org. spontaneity POS In-role performance Positive mood Withdraw behavior

Latent factor correlations-1/2 Tenure Exchange ideology Affective commitment Felt obligation Org. spontaneity POS In-role performance Positive mood Withdraw behavior

Latent factor correlations 2/2 4 conditions (Kenny et al. 1998) Initial variable should be related the criterion variables Initial variable should be related to mediators Mediators should be related to the outcome variables Mediators may reduce the influence among initial variable and outcomes

Latent factor correlations-1/2 Tenure Exchange ideology Affective commitment Felt obligation Org. spontaneity POS In-role performance Positive mood Withdraw behavior

Mediation Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables Major variables Variables Results Control variables 2. Mediation Fully mediated model Paths 1. Modelling Partially mediated model 3. Moderation Discriminant validity of the constructs Centralization & Interaction Main effects partialing Standard HMR analysis Factor correlations Simple effects test

Fully mediated model POS Tenure Exchange ideology Affective commitment Felt obligation Org. spontaneity POS In-role performance Positive mood Withdraw behavior

Partially mediated model Tenure Exchange ideology Affective commitment Felt obligation Org. spontaneity POS In-role performance Positive mood Withdraw behavior Fit better than the fully mediated model, according to the change in Chi-square

The result of models comparison 1/2 .39* Tenure Exchange ideology 68.6% Affective commitment 59.2% .45* Felt obligation .18* 5.2% .26* Org. spontaneity .38* POS 8.5% In-role performance .35* .23* Positive mood .12* -.11 12.5% 36.6% Withdraw behavior -.12*

Mediator test 1/2 4 conditions (Kenny et al. 1998) Initial variable should be related the criterion variables Initial variable should be related to mediators Mediators should be related to the outcome variables Mediators may reduce the influence among initial variable and outcomes Unstandardized path coefficients among POS and Mediators  Unstandardized path coefficients among Mediators and Performance variables, respectively

Mediator test 2/2 POS 68.6% 59.2% 5.2% 8.5% 12.5% 36.6% .39* Tenure Exchange ideology 68.6% Affective commitment 59.2% .45* Felt obligation .18* 5.2% .26* Org. spontaneity .38* POS 8.5% In-role performance .35* .23* Positive mood .12* -.11 12.5% 36.6% Withdraw behavior -.12*

Moderation Results 2. Mediation 1. Modelling 3. Moderation Variables Major variables Variables Results Control variables 2. Mediation Fully mediated model Paths 1. Modelling Partially mediated model 3. Moderation Discriminant validity of the constructs Centralization & Interaction Main effects partialing Standard HMR analysis Factor correlations Simple effects test

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Major variables Variables Results Control variables 2. Mediation Fully mediated model Paths 1. Modelling Partially mediated model 3. Moderation Discriminant validity of the constructs Centralization & Interaction Main effects partialing Standard HMR analysis Factor correlations Simple effects test

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Exchange Ideology H2 Felt Obligation POS H2 : The relationship between POS and felt obligation will increase with the strength of employee exchange ideology. Steps： Centralization & Intersection Main effects partialing Standard HMR analysis Simple effect tests

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Exchange Ideology H2 Felt Obligation POS Step 1： Centralization & Intersection. 1a) For preventing the issues of Multi-Collinearity, high correlation between the predictor variable and the interaction item, author calculated the average of each POS & Felt Obligation, then make deductions from each value (Centralization).

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Exchange Ideology H2 Felt Obligation POS Step 1： Centralization & Intersection. 1b) Create the Product term interaction. Product term interaction (Scale Score) ＝ POS * Exchange Ideology

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Exchange Ideology H2 Felt Obligation POS Step 2： Main effects partialing. 2a) Partialing out (分解) the main effects of POS and Employee Exchange Ideology on Felt Obligation. 2b) Enter the product terms and the control variable (Tenure年資) into the equation.

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Exchange Ideology H2 Felt Obligation POS Step 3： Standard HMR analysis. 3a) Execute Standard Hierarchical moderated regression analysis. 3b) Analyze the results.

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Exchange Ideology H2 Felt Obligation POS Step 3： Standard HMR analysis. 3b) Analyze the results. (I) Tenure and the main effects of POS & Employee Exchange Ideology accounted for 46.5% of the variance in Felt Obligation.

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Step 3： Standard HMR analysis. 3b) Analyze the results. (II) Both POS (β=.34, p<.01) and Employee Exchange Ideology (β=-.49, p<.01) were significant unique predictors. (III) The addition of the interaction (POS X Employee Exchange Ideology ) had the predicted reliable effect (β=.12, p<.01). Consistent with Hypothesis H2

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis The relationship between POS & Felt Obligation was greater for high-exchange ideology employees compared to those low in exchange ideology.

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Exchange Ideology H2 Felt Obligation POS  

Result – Moderating Effects Analysis Step 4： Simple effects tests. (T-test, df = N-4 =409) 4b/4c) Run additional Simple effects test 2 at low and high levels of POS (1 and 7, respectively) to examine data.    

Finding & Conclusion

Key Findings POS Exchange ideology Affective Commitment Felt obligation Positive mood Affective Commitment Org. Spontaneity In-role Perform. Withdrawal Behavior Exchange ideology

Key Findings POS was positively related to employees’ felt obligation to care about the organization’s welfare and to help the organization reach its objectives. Exchange ideology Affective Commitment Felt obligation Org. Spontaneity POS In-role Perform. Positive mood Withdrawal Behavior

Key Findings The relationship between POS and felt obligation increased with employees’ acceptance of the reciprocity norm as applied to work organizations. Exchange ideology Affective Commitment Felt obligation Org. Spontaneity POS In-role Perform. Positive mood Withdrawal Behavior

Key Findings Felt obligation mediated the associations of POS with affective commitment, organizational spontaneity, and in-role performance. Exchange ideology Affective Commitment Felt obligation Org. Spontaneity POS In-role Perform. Positive mood Withdrawal Behavior

Key Findings Positive mood independently mediated the relationships of POS with affective commitment and organizational spontaneity. Exchange ideology Affective Commitment Felt obligation Org. Spontaneity POS In-role Perform. Positive mood Withdrawal Behavior

Key Findings POS Felt obligation Positive mood Affective Commitment Org. Spontaneity In-role Perform. Withdrawal Behavior Exchange ideology These findings support social exchange interpretations of employee-employer relationships that emphasize reciprocity-based obligations.

POS, Felt Obligation, and Positive Mood Repeated favorable treatment received from the organization increases employees’ felt obligation to continue their employment and to help the organization achieve its goals (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Rousseau & McLean Parks, 1993; Robinson & Wolf Morrison, 1995; Rousseau, 1995; Ko et al, 1997). Employees’ perception of the organization’s commitment to them (POS) contributes to a general obligation, based on the reciprocity norm, to care about their organization and to contribute to organizational objectives (Eisenberg et al, 2001).

POS, Exchange Ideology, and Felt Obligation When POS was low: Workers with a strong exchange ideology expressed much less obligation than workers with a weak exchange ideology. When POS was high: Workers with a strong exchange ideology expressed approximately the same level of felt obligation as workers with a weak exchange ideology.

POS-affective commitment & POS-withdraw behavior Withdrawal Behavior POS’s fulfillment of esteem and affiliation needs may increase employees’ incorporation of organizational membership and role status into their social identity. Social identification has been considered an important part of affective commitment (N.J. Allen & Meyer, 1996; Mowday et al, 1979). Future research might examine the role of social identification in the associations of POS with affective commitment and withdraw behavior.

Limitations Findings that felt obligation and positive mood were associated with spontaneity might be amplified by distinguishing different kinds of spontaneity across more diverse samples. The causal direction of the observed relationships: Rewards for superior performance might lead workers to feel greater obligation; based on feeling obligation to the organization, workers may conclude that the organization values their contributions and holds them in high regard (POS). Rewards for Performance Felt obligation POS

Conclusion The present findings support social exchange interpretations that stress reciprocation’s role in employee-employer relationships. Employees’ responsiveness to the reciprocity norm provides a basis for understanding how the favorableness and perceived intentionality of treatment received from the organization influence affective commitment and performance and why employees differ in their reciprocation of favorable treatment. POS contributes to employees’ felt obligation to care about the organization‘s welfare and to act in the organization’s behalf, which, in turn, enhances affective organizational commitment, organizational spontaneity, and in-role performance.

Thank you for listening

Perceived Organizational Support Reciprocation of Perceived Organizational Support 量化研究方法與應用 沈芯菱、李杭、黃慧珠、吳國偉、董建華 1st Nov, 2016