Employee Commitment in the Workplace: Examination of Change Processes Kathleen Bentein May 2002

Organizational Commitment A psychological state that characterizes an employee’s relationship with the organization which has implications for the employee’s intention to remain with the organization Important evolution: From unidimensional to multidimensional perspectives… The most frequently applied model: Meyer & Allen (1991; 1997)

Dimensions of Organizational Commitment Affective (AC) Normative (NC) Continuance (CC) Meyer & Allen (1991; 1997)

Dimensions of Organizational Commitment Affective (AC) Normative (NC) Continuance (CC) Meyer & Allen (1991; 1997) McGee & Ford (1987)

Dimensions of Organizational Commitment Affective (AC) Normative (NC) Meyer & Allen (1991; 1997) McGee & Ford (1987) High Sacrifice (HS) Low Alternatives (LA)

Dimensions of Organizational Commitment Affective (AC) Normative (NC) All dimensions simultaneously… High Sacrifice (HS) Low Alternatives (LA)

Purpose of this study No research paradigm to date has successfully modeled or operationalized a process truly representing a concomitant existence of the four Allen and Meyer dimensions across time. It has also been assumed that change in commitment across time will result in a change in turnover intention across time, and that the change in turnover intention will be associated with actual turnover behavior. But this assumption has never truly been tested. WHY? Researchers were not able to correctly model change statistically

Purpose of this study Concomitant existence of the four Allen and Meyer dimensions across time. Change in commitment  change in turnover intention  actual turnover behavior. Using Latent Growth Modeling (LGM)  To build change into commitment dimensions

Basic form of a Second Order Factor (SOF) Latent Growth Model (LGM) Cov IS - CH Initial Status - AC Change - AC It.11 Affective Commit. Time 1 It.61 … Affective Commit. Time 2 It.12 It.62 … Affective Commit. Time 3 It.13 It.63 …

Cov IS - CH Initial Status - AC Change - AC It.11 Affective Commit. Time 1 It.61 … Affective Commit. Time 2 It.12 It.62 … Affective Commit. Time 3 It.13 It.63 … Turnover Intention …An augmented SOF LGM

Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Change Low Alternatives Initial Status Change

Method: Procedure & Sample Procedure: longitudinal study Sample: 330 employees (Alumni) Time 1 AC, NC, HS, LA + Turn. Intent. Time 2 AC, NC, HS, LA + Turn. Intent. Time 3 AC, NC, HS, LA + Turn. Intent. Time 4 Turnover + 3 months + 9 months

Method: Measures Organizational Commitment: Affective Commitment - AC (6 items) Example: “I really feel that I belong in this organization” Normative Commitment - NC (6 items) Example: “It would not be morally right for me to leave this organization now” High Sacrifice - HS (3 items) Example: “I would not leave this organization because of what I would stand to loose” Low Alternatives - LA (3 items) Example: “I have no choice but to stay with this organization”

Method: Measures Organizational Commitment: 18 items (6 AC, 6 NC, 3 HS, 3 LA) Turnover Intention (TI): 2 items “ I often think about quitting this organization ” “ I intend to search for a position with another employer within the next year ”

Method: Measures Organizational Commitment: 18 items (6 AC, 6 NC, 3 HS, 3 LA) Turnover Intention (TI): 2 items Turnover: Stayers were rated as 1 while Voluntary leavers were rated as 2. The percentage of turnover after Time 3 was 13%.

Method: Measures Organizational Commitment: 18 items (6 AC, 6 NC, 3 HS, 3 LA) Turnover Intention (TI): 2 items Turnover: stayers were rated as 1 / voluntary leavers rated as 2 All items were anchored with a 5-point Likert-type scale 1 = strongly disagree 5 = strongly agree to

Method: Data Analysis Measurement invariance Latent Growth Modeling (LGM) analyses Univariate SOF LGM analyses The form of the growth trajectory for each variable Multivariate SOF LGM model The relationships between the initial status and change variables across the four dimensions

Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Change Low Alternatives Initial Status Change

Method: Data Analysis Measurement invariance Latent Growth Modeling (LGM) analyses Univariate SOF LGM analyses The form of the growth trajectory for each variable Multivariate SOF LGM model The relationships between the initial status and change variables across the four dimensions Augmented multivariate SOF LGM model The relationships between commitment dimensions and outcomes

Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Change Low Alternatives Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior

Method: Data Analysis Measurement invariance Latent Growth Modeling (LGM) analyses Univariate SOF LGM analyses The form of the growth trajectory for each variable Multivariate SOF LGM model The relationships between the initial status and change variables across the four dimensions Augmented multivariate SOF LGM model The relationships between commitment dimensions and outcomes

Growth Parameters Estimates The optimal form of change for each construct that must be carried into the remaining analyses: AC: a linear decreasing trajectory (Cov IS-CH = -.04**) NC: a linear decreasing trajectory (Cov IS-CH = -.09*) HS: a flat trajectory LA: a flat trajectory TI: a linear increasing trajectory (Cov IS-CH = -.01 NS)

Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Change Low Alternatives Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior

Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior

Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status Turnover Behavior

Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status Turnover Behavior

Examination of the Interplay among the Commitment Dimensions across Time Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status

Examination of the Interplay among the Commitment Dimensions across Time Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status.39*** * ***6. Initial S - LA.06.13*.16.25***5. Initial S - HS -.37**.67*** -.27**4. Change - NC -.36***.46***3. Initial S - NC -.32**2. Change - AC 1. Initial S - AC 54321Parameter

Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status Examination of the Interplay among the Commitment Dimensions across Time.39*** * ***6. Initial S - LA.06.13*.16.25***5. Initial S - HS -.37**.67*** -.27**4. Change - NC -.36***.46***3. Initial S - NC -.32**2. Change - AC 1. Initial S - AC 54321Parameter

Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status Examination of the Interplay among the Commitment Dimensions across Time.39*** * ***6. Initial S - LA.06.13*.16.25***5. Initial S - HS -.37**.67*** -.27**4. Change - NC -.36***.46***3. Initial S - NC -.32**2. Change - AC 1. Initial S - AC 54321Parameter

Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status Examination of the Interplay among the Commitment Dimensions across Time.39*** * ***6. Initial S - LA.06.13*.16.25***5. Initial S - HS -.37**.67*** -.27**4. Change - NC -.36***.46***3. Initial S - NC -.32**2. Change - AC 1. Initial S - AC 54321Parameter Change patterns of AC and NC strongly interrelated

Examination of the Interplay among the Commitment Dimensions across Time.39*** * ***6. Initial S - LA.06.13*.16.25***5. Initial S - HS -.37**.67*** -.27**4. Change - NC -.36***.46***3. Initial S - NC -.32**2. Change - AC 1. Initial S - AC 54321Parameter Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status

Examination of the Interplay among the Commitment Dimensions across Time.39*** * ***6. Initial S - LA.06.13*.16.25***5. Initial S - HS -.37**.67*** -.27**4. Change - NC -.36***.46***3. Initial S - NC -.32**2. Change - AC 1. Initial S - AC 54321Parameter Change in AC and NC independent of HS and LA Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status

Examination of the Structural Effects of Growth Parameters on Outcomes Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status

.42***.30***Turnover *-.43* **.09Change - TI.10*-.31***-.16**-.42***Initial S - TI CH - TIIS - TIIS - LAIS - HSCH -NCIS - NCCH - ACIS - AC The primary drivers for the increase in TI were the declines in AC and NC Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status

.42***.30***Turnover *-.43* **.09Change - TI.10*-.31***-.16**-.42***Initial S - TI CH - TIIS - TIIS - LAIS - HSCH -NCIS - NCCH - ACIS - AC Turnover Intention Initial Status Change Turnover Behavior Affective Commit. Initial Status Change Normative Commit. Initial Status Change High Sacrifice Initial Status Low Alternatives Initial Status Change in TI strongly associated with turnover

Conclusion Successfully isolating change -> a more accurate picture as to how the dimensions are simultaneously processed by individuals Change only on AC and NC, HS and LA more stable. Change in AC and NC strongly interrelated. At the core of both AC and NC is sets of attributes that are more personnal in nature and very sensitive and responsive to organizational events. Change in AC and NC independent of HS and LA. This might advocate against a rationalization process.

Conclusion Successfully isolating change -> a more accurate picture as to how the dimensions are simultaneously processed by individuals as to how shifts in the processing impact important employee behaviors - IS-TI and CH-TI dissociated from one another - positive association between IS and CH for AC and NC - primary drivers for CH-TI = CH-AC and CH-NC - CH-TI = strong predictor of turnover behavior  Reducing turnover must be a sustained effort over time.

Conclusion The present study… -advances our knowledge of the commitment dimensions -represents a contribution to the comprehension of the LGM methodology