Job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived organizational support as predictors of organizational commitment

Walden University

ScholarWorks

 "&&%''#"&"#'#% '(&

# '#"



Job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support as predictors of

organizational commitment

Jennifer Parker Ayers

Walden University

# #*'&"'#" *#%&' .$&&# %*#%&* "((&&%''#"&

%'#' %",'#" )#%"-#%+#!!#"&"' #'#"  ''#"

#("& "#!!#"&

-&&&%''#"&%#(''#+#(#%%"#$"&&+' "&&%''#"&"#'#% '(&# '#"'# %#%&'&"

$'#%" (&#"" "&&%''#"&"#'#% '(&+"('#%,!"&'%'#%## %#%&#%!#%"#%!'#"$ &

#"'' # %#%&* "((

Walden Universit

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by

Jennifer Parker Ayers

has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects,

and that any and all revisions required by

the review committee have been made.

Review Committee

Dr. Adam Rubenstein, Committee Chairperson, Psychology Faculty

Dr. Gwynne Dawdy, Committee Member, Psychology Faculty

Dr. Barry Trunk, Committee Member, Psychology Faculty

Chief Academic Officer

Denise DeZolt, Ph.D.

Walden University

2010

ABSTRACT

Job Satisfaction, Job Involvement, and Perceived Organizational Support as Predictors of

Organizational Commitment

Jennifer Parker Ayers

M.S., Alabama A&M University, 2001

B.S., University of Alabama, 1998

Dissertation Doctoral Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Psychology

Walden University

February 2010

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to determine whether or not there is a significant

relationship between job satisfaction, job involvement, perceived organizational

support, and organizational commitment among educators. A review of the literature

revealed there is limited research that examined organizational behaviors among

educators. Organizational commitment has been identified as a leading factor

impacting an employee’s level of success in various organizations. There remains a

gap in the current literature regarding specific attitudinal behaviors influencing

organizational commitment across various levels of education. Organizational

commitment among educators employed at the primary, secondary, and post-

secondary levels was examined. The sample for this study included 900 educators in a

southern U.S. state. Based on the social exchange and leader member Exchange

theories, this study used a nonexperimental quantitative design. The data were

analyzed using three hierarchical multiple regressions. The findings of this study

revealed a signifant relationship between job satisfaction, job involvement, and

organiztional commitment. Given the signifance of these findings, promotion of

dialogue within education could enhance social exchange relations, employee

involvement, and eduactor commitment. Social change implications include the

improvement of the educational services and student success outcomes and promotion

of the importance of quality workplace exchanges, personal growth, leadership,

scholarship, collaboration, and the benefits of a highly committed workforce.

Job Satisfaction, Job Involvement, and Perceived Organizational Support as Predictors of

Organizational Commitment

Jennifer Parker Ayers

M.S., Alabama A&M University, 2001

B.S., University of Alabama, 1998

Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

School of Psychology

Walden University

March 2010

UMI Number: 3397132

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3397132

010 by ProQuest LLC.

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC

789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346

Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

DEDICATION

To my son, Jacob Barrack Ayers, “Sunny Boy”, “Just Jacob”,….you are the best!,

I dedicate this labor of love to you. Thank you for keeping me in line with our “names”

and all. For a 3 year old, you really are a Rock Star!

I Love you,

“Mommy Joe”

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

To my supportive and understanding family, Reece, Jacob Barrack, and my canine son,

Samson, I thank each of you for giving Mommy the time and space to work, My Parents:

Mommy and Daddy, thank you for your sacrifices, love, and your financial support when

I needed it the most. To my sisters: Kim, Tammalee, Pricilla, and Dionne for the best

words of encouragement to get me to the next step when I felt I could no longer endure

the task; My brother Carl, My Mom Lynette G., My Bestest, Kimmi, My extended

family Uncle-Daddy Alvin and Mama B, thank you for believing in me;Dwayne Green

thank you for all the help with all my computer malfunctions, The North Division

General Conference of Seventh-day Adventist for my scholarships; my Dissertation

Committee Members: Dr. G. Dawdy, Dr. A. Rubenstein, and Dr. B. Trunk for helping me

to accomplish this surrmounting task; Thank you to my Editor in Chief, Dr. Sue Kopel,

and last, but never least, thank GOD, my “Rock” and “My Main Man”, who always gives

me just enough strength for the step I am on!

“Do not be afraid, for I have ransomed you.

I have called you by name: you are mine.

When you go through deep waters and great trouble,

I will be with you.

When you go through rivers of difficulty, you will not drown!

When you walk through the fire of oppression,

you will not be burned up;

the flames will not consume you.”

Isaiah 43:1-2

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................v

CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY ............................................................1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................1

Background of the Study ...............................................................................................3

Statement of Problem .....................................................................................................5

Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................7

Hypotheses .....................................................................................................................9

Definition of Terms......................................................................................................10

Assumptions, Scope, and Limitations ..........................................................................12

Significance of the Study .............................................................................................13

Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................15

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................18

Introduction ..................................................................................................................18

Theoretical Framework of the Study ...........................................................................19

Social Exchange Theory ....................................................................................... 20

Leader-Member Exchange Theory ....................................................................... 30

Perceived Organizational Support ...............................................................................39

Job Involvement ...........................................................................................................50

Job Satisfaction ............................................................................................................56

Organizational Commitment ........................................................................................61

Gender ..........................................................................................................................68

Tenure ..........................................................................................................................73

Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................76

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHOD .............................................................................79

Introduction ..................................................................................................................79

Research Design...........................................................................................................80

Target Population and Sample .....................................................................................81

Hypotheses ...................................................................................................................82

Instrumentation ............................................................................................................83

Data Collection Methods .............................................................................................88

Data Analysis ...............................................................................................................89

Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................90

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ...................................................................................................92

Introduction ..................................................................................................................92

Descriptive Analysis ....................................................................................................92

Multivariate Analysis and Hypothesis Testing ............................................................96

Chapter Summary ......................................................................................................105

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........106

Introduction ................................................................................................................106

Summary ....................................................................................................................106

Conclusions and Interpretations .................................................................................114

Limitations, Assumptions, and Scope of the Study ...................................................118

Significance of Findings ............................................................................................119

Implications for Practice ............................................................................................120

Future Research .........................................................................................................123

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................128

APPENDIX A:LETTER OF INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE STUDY ......137

APPENDIX B: DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY ..................................................................138

APPENDIX C: JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY ..........................................................139

APPENDIX D: JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY REPRINTED PERMISSION ..........140

APPENDIX E: JOB INVOLVEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE ..........................................141

APPENDIX F: JOB INVOLVEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE PERMISSION .................142

APPENDIX G:

SURVEY OF PERCIVED ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT ..............144

APPENDIX H: SPOS REPRINTED PERMISSION ......................................................145

APPENDIX I: TCM EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT SURVEY.....................................146

APPENDIX J: TCM EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT SURVEY PERMISSION ...........148

CURRICULUM VITAE ..................................................................................................149

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Frequency Distribution of Participants’ Demograghics…………………...93

Table 2. Summary Statistics for Participant Demographics………………………...94

Table 3. Summary Statististics of the Subscales for the Job Satisfaction Survey..…95

Table 4. Summary Statistics of All Inventory Scores………………………………96

Table 5. Regression Results for Four Predictors of Affective Commitment……….98

Table 6. Regression Results for Four Predictors of Continuance Commitment…..100

Table 7. Regression Results for Four Predictors of Normative Commitment…….102

CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

Introduction

Since the late 19

century there has been an increased interest in factors that

distinguish functional organizations from successful organizations. For years researchers

sought to explain organizational success by the value of a company’s stock portfolio,

administrative structure and organizational chart. Most recently, organizations have

begun to take a closer look at interpersonal factors that may impact workforce dynamics

and productivity (Parnell & Crandall, 2003; Somech & Ron, 2007). Moreover, they have

begun to examine people power and the role it plays in organizational networks.

Researchers have sought to discover which variables have the greatest impact, if any, on

organizational outcomes (Parrnell & Crandall, 2003; Somech & Ron, 2007). Researchers

have discovered that no single attribute or attitudinal variable thus far can explain the

dynamics of employee organizational commitment (Abbott, Boyd, & Miles, 2006;

Caselman & Brandt, 2007; Clay-Warner, Reynolds, & Roman, 2005).

Social exchanges in the workplace have a direct impact on workplace outcomes

such as employee turnover (Coyle-Shapiro & Conway; 2005; 2005; Feather & Rauter,

2004; Freund, 2005; Hofmann, & Morgeson, 1999; Hofmann, Morgeson & Gerras,

2003). Organizations continue to seek answers regarding employee workplace and

citizenship behaviors (Joiner & Bakalis, 2006; Parnell & Crandall, 2003; Somech & Ron,

2007). However, it will be necessary for them to gain further insight into the quality and

characteristics of workforce interactions and relationships. Not only are peer subordinate

relationship interactions important, but also the quality of interaction between a

supervisor and a subordinate (Joiner & Bakalis, 2006; Parnell & Crandall, 2003; Somech

& Ron, 2007). Past studies indicated that the quality of the supervisor subordinate

relationship is very important because supervisors perform as an organizational agent

helping to facilitate the goals of the organization on the most interactive level (Afza,

2005; Blau, 1964; Erdogan, Kraimer, & Liden, 2002; Marcus & House, 1973; Neves &

Caetano, 2006).

Compared to other countries, the United States continues to be the leading pioneer

in providing participative work environments (Scott, Bishop, & Chen, 2003).

Participative (collaborative) work environments are workforces that encourage and

support job involvement. Scott et al. argued that in order for a collaborative workforce to

be achieved, employees must be willing to work beyond the call of duty and they must be

committed to the organization.

Another facet related to organizational commitment that has also recently

received attention is the relationship that subordinates share with each other. Specifically,

supportive work groups have been reported to help clarify job roles, decrease role

ambiguity, provide social and moral support, and provide opportunities for positive work

experiences (Abbott et al., 2006; Freund, 2005; Obeng & Ugboro, 2003). Employees

who are satisfied with their work environment, and are involved in additional work duties

are also likely to report higher work commitment. Employees who are dissatisfied with

their employment only complete the minimum workplace duties (Chen & Hung, 2006;

Chen, Lin, Lu, & Taso, 2007; Chen, Tsui, & Far, 2002).

The extant literature is limited regarding organizational commitment in

educational settings. Strict attention was needed to examine specific antecedents and

consequences among educators including: age, gender, tenure, job satisfaction, level of

work involvement, and perception of organizational support (Joiner & Bakalis, 2006;

Karrasch, 2003; Karsh, Booske, & Sainfort, 2005; Obeng &Ugboro, 2003; O’Driscoll et

al., 2003). It was hypothesized that there is a significant relationship between job

satisfaction, job involvement, perceived organizational support, and employee

organizational commitment.

Background of the Study

The quality of the relationship between an organization’s individual

members not only impacts the immediate primary parties involved in professional

interactions, but also society at large (Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982). Mowday et al.

argued that without a significant level of employee commitment within organizations, the

organization as a system, will not survive. The success of most organizations is

dependent upon the level of quality exchanges among its members.

Organizations have existed for centuries and as early as the mid 19

century

philosophers began theorizing which factors make the greatest difference in employee

organizational commitment. Mowday et al. (1982) asserted that changes in the profile of

the workplace would eventually influence employee expections and demands of

organizations. Demographic changes like age, race, education, gender, personality, and

economics would have the greatest impact on social changes among employees within

and outside of the organization.

As early as 1954, the subject of organizational commitment has been one of

interest. Mowday et al. (1982) suggested three reasons for that interest: (a) employee

commitment is assumed to be a reliable predictor of behaviors such as absenteeism,

employee satisfaction, and turnover; (b) organizational commitment determents is of

interest to organizational administrators and behavioral scientist and; (c) understanding

orgnaizational commitment could prove insight to the psychological process that

influences employee attachment, identification, and belonging. One factor researchers

have yet to disagree upon is that employee commitment is a process influenced by

workforce interactions that eventually unfold

over time (Drunkman, 1998; Farrel &

Finkelstein, 2007; Feather & Rauter, 2004; Wegge, Schmidt, Parkes, & Dick, 2007).

For the past 4 decades, industrial and organizational researchers have focused

their attention on factors that influence employee commtiment. While much of the earlier

studies primarily focused on employee satisfaction, studies during the past 20 years have

explored the impact of other attitudinal concepts such as perceived support and job

involvement (Drunkman, 1998; Farrel & Finkelstein, 2007; Feather & Rauter, 2004;

Wegge, Schmidt, Parkes, & Dick, 2007).

Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) examined more than 70 studies related to

workplace outcomes including perceived organizational support and organizational

commitment. Their research further emphasized the importance of antecedents and

consequences that may mediate the relationship perceived organizational support and

organizational behaviors.

More recently, organizations have turned their attention towards antecedents like

workplace social interactions. Interactions such as employee, leadership, and personnel

interactions and the dynamics of that relationship to provide a possible explainations for

employee workplace behavioral outcomes ( Rhoades & Eisenberger (2002) . Recent

studies indicated that the quality of the relationship between employer and employee does

effect employee satisfaction (Hallberg & Schaufeli, 2006; Idsoe, 2006; Karrarsch, 2003;

Karsh et al., 2005). The quality of that relationship has also been linked to organizational

commitment (Joiner & Bakalis, 2006; Kidd & Smewing, 2001; Makanjee, Hartzer, &

Uys, 2006; Obeng & Ugboro, 2003). Researchers argued that an employee’s level of

commitment is not only impacted by their interactive experiences, but is also influenced

by the employees’ perception of organizational support and the stability and security of

employment with a given organization (Chen et al., 2007; Coyle-Shapiro, & Conway,

2005; Kacmar, Witt, Zivnuska, & Gully, 2003).

Statement of Problem

The problem addressed in this study is that although extensive research has been

done to study work attitudes and organizational behaviors, organizational commitment

has been identified as a leading factor impacting the level of success of many

organizations (Meyer & Allen,1997). As organizations strategize to increase

organizational productivity, it was necessary for the industrial and organizational sectors

to evaluate which behaviors, attitudes, and factors bare the greatest influence on an

employee’s decision to make a commitment (Chen, Silverwork, & Hung, 2006; Collier &

Esteban, 2007; Coyle-Shapiro & Conway, 2005; Meyer & Allen, 1997). The purpose of

this study was to to investigate whether or not job satisfaction, job involvement, and

perceived organizational support significantly effects organizational commitment among

educators at various levels of eduction. Research on leadership behaviors indicated that

the relationship between the leader and subordinate is significantly influenced by

subordinate role behaviors (Afza, 2003; Chen et al., 2002; Deluga, 1994). Hofmann et al.

(2003) found that “In high quality relationships, the leader and subordinate engage in

collaborative problem solving, eventually resulting in a set of interlocking role behaviors

that are mutually reinforcing” (p. 171). This study emphasized the value of a quality

relationship between employees and employers and its benefits in the world of work.

An analysis of relevant research to date found few studies that have been

conducted to evaluate organizational commitment among educators. Specifically, there

were no studies that assessed employee commitment among varied levels of education

including elementary, middle, high school, and post secondary education. Several studies

indicated that no single factor contributes to employee satisfaction or commitment;

however, serveral factors have been investigated.

In chapter 2, a review of the literature relevant to organizational commitment is

discussed. According to the literature job satisfaction is the most investigated variable

related to organizational commitment. Nonetheless, other variables have been

investigated and have been found to influence an employee’s level of commitment and

their decision to remain with an organization for an extended period of time.

Purpose of the Study

Although researchers have identified multiple variables that predict organizational

commitment, they have not agreed on two specific outcomes. First, no single variable has

been indicated as the sole factor directly impacting workplace outcomes including

organizational commitment and turnover intentions, and second, more empirical research

is needed to narrow the scope of predictors of organizational commitment for practical

employment commitment and retention (Chen et al., 2007 Clay-Warner et al., 2005;

Coyle-Sharpiro & Conway, 2005; Hafer & Martin, 2006; Makanjee, Hartzer & Uys,

2006; Wegge et al., 2007).

Organizational commitment has been identified as a leading factor impacting the

level of success in many organizations (Meyer & Allen, 1993). This study examined the

relationship between job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived organizational

support as predictors of organizational commitment among educators. In addition,

gender, a unique demographic variable have also been identified for closer examination

and whether or not it is a factor significantly influencing the major construct variables of

interest. In recent years, organizations have acknowledged that their workforce can only

be as successful as their best organizational leaders and the employees who work under

their leadership. There is little evidence in the literature that identified specific factors

that impact organizational commitment among educators (Chang & Choi, 2007; Chen et

al, 2007; Freund, 2005; Obeng & Ugboro, 2003).

Because teacher student rapport and involvement has been identified as two key

components influncing student success (Darling-Hammonds, 2000; Harme & Pianta,

2001), it was worthwhile for educational institutions to investigate factors that may

influence educator commitment and their decision to remain with an organization. Chang

and Choi (2007) indicated that educators are often committed to their career and a given

organization. However, their commitment to their careers often take precedence over

their commitment to a place of employment (Chang & Choi, 2007; Feather & Rauter,

2004; Freund, 2005; Joiner & Bakalis, 2006).

Many organizations seek to provide and promote a safe and supportive workforce.

Some companies have gone to the extent demonstrating to employees how much they

care about their well-being by providing on site child care, and physical training

facilities. Research has shown that employees who perceived that an organization is

genuinely concerned about their welfare are more likely to voluntarily become more

involved and contribute to the organizations overall success (Collier & Esteban, 2007).

In response to dedicated and committed employee efforts, organizations respond by

consistently introducing new programs and incentives to entice and increase productivity,

loyality, morale, job satisfaction, and reduced intentions of turnover (Abbott et al., 2007).

The basic assumption is that if employees experience an enriched work enviornment as

evidence by high levels of commitment, job involvment, perceived supervsior support,

and job satisfaction, they will also be inspired to, in kind, produce exceptional quality

work on behalf of the organization. Theory of Social Exchange and the Leader Member

Exchange theory were used to examine the relationship among the variables selected for

the study. Both theories selected, highlighed the transparency of the importance of a

quality relationship between educational leadership and it’s members. In addition, the

significant impact of job statisfaction, job involvement, and perceived organizational

support on educator commitment outcomes was indicated.

Hypotheses

The research question of this study examined whether or not there was a

relationship between gender, job satisfaction, job involvement, perceived organizational

support, and affective, continuance, and normative organizational commitment.

Hypothesis 1

Higher Affective commitment scores as measured by the TCM Employee

Commitment Survey Affective Commitment Subscale will be related to gender, higher

job satisfaction, higher job involvement, and higher perceived organizational support.

Hypothesis 2

There is a relationship between higher continuance commitment as measured by

the TCM Commitment Survey Continuance Commitment Subscale and gender, higher

job satisfaction, higher job involvement, and higher perceived organizational support.

Hypothesis 3

Male educators with higher normative commitment scores as measured by the

TCM Employee Commitment Survey Normative Commitment Subscale, will also have

higher of job satisfaction, higher job involvement, and higher perceived organizational

support.

Definition of Terms

The following will provide an operational definition and explaination of terms

freqently used in the study:

Affective commitment: Refers to the employee’s emotional attachement to,

identification with, and involvement in the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1997).

Continuance commitment: Refers to an awareness of the costs associated with

leaving the organization. Employees with continuance commit stay on a need basis

(Meyer & Allen, 1997).

Interdependence: An interactive relationship between individuals or groups that is

expected to result in a beneficial outcome for all parties involved (Lawler & Thye, 1999).

Job involvement: Two theoretical definitions of job involvement are significant

to this study: (a) “the degree to which the total job situation is a central life interest or the

degree to which it is perceived to be a major source for the satisfaction of important

needs” (Saleh & Hosek, 1976. p. 213) and (b) “an individuals psychological

identification with a job” (Kanungo, 1982, p. 97). This study will use the Job

Involvement Questionnaire to measure this construct.

Job Satisfaction: Three theoretical definitions of job satisfaction are relevant to

this study: (a) “the emotional state resulting from the apprasial of one’s job and as such

can be negative, positive, or neutral” (Avery, 1995, p. 273) and (b) “the extent to which

people like or dislike their job” (Spector, 1997, p. 2). This study will use the Job

Satisfaction Survey to measure this construct (Spector, 1994).

Normative commitment: Is a reflection of an employee’s feeling of obligation to

continue employment with the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1997).

Organizational commitment: Two theoretical definitions are relevant to this study:

(a) “a psychological state, characterizing an individual’s relationship with the

organization, in accepting the goal of the organization and the willingness to exert effort

to achieve its goals” and (b) “the relative strength of an individual’s identification with

and involvement in a particular organization (Mowday et al., 1982, p. 27). This study will

use the Three Model Commitment Scale to measure this contruct (Meyer & Allen, 1997).

Perceived organizational support: Four theoretical definitions are relevant to this

study: (a) “ an employee’s global belief concerning the extent to which the organization

values its contributions and cares about their well-bieng” (Eisenberger et al., 2002, p.

567) (b) “a measure of an organizations commitment to its employees” (Makanjee et al.,

2006, p. 118); (c) “perceived organizational support is the degree to which an employee

feels that they are supported by their supervisor” (Gagon & Michael, 2004, p. 173) and

(d) percived organizational support is an employee’s with their relationship with their

supervisor and how well they can depend on their supervisor to attend their individual

concerns (Lynch, Eisenberger, & Armeli, 1999).

Perceived supervisor support: Two theoretical definitions are relevant to this

study: (a) “perceived superviosor support is an attitudinal type of perceived

organizational support” (Idsoe, 2006, p. 49) and (b) “ an employee’s perception that their

supervisor values their contributions and cares about their well-being (Shanock &

Eisenberger, 2006, p. 689). This study will use the Survey of Perceived Organizational

Support (SPOS) (Eisenberger, Huntington, & Sowa, 1986).

Self interest: A person or an organization’s justification to participate for personal

advantage (Lawler & Thye, 1999).

Assumptions, Scope, and Limitations

The following assumptions were made regarding this study:

1. The TCM Employee Commitment Survey, the Perceived Organizational

Support Survey, the Job Involvement Questionnaire, and the Job Satisfaction Survey

wouldl be appropriate instruments to gather information to answer the proposed

research questions.

2. The participants would be able to understand the directions and the

questions presented in the surveys selected for the study.

3. The participants would represent educators, and outcomes may not be

generalized to other professions.

4. The scope of the study may be limited as it would only represent educators

who have chosen to participate in the study and regard survey research as a valuable

tool for organizational advancement and who are committed to opportunities to

contribute to postive social change within the field of Education as individual.

5. An expected limitation of the study was related to the use of self reported

questionnares because of self-report bias, fear of retaliation, and the participations

perception on the importance of the factors that influence organizational support.

Significance of the Study

The high cost associated with training and supporting personnel has caused

organizations to re-examine the sensitive relationship that may exist between job

satisfaction, job involvement, perceptions of organizational support, and other factors

related to organizational commitment. Studies have presented supportive and conflicting

evidence concerning the interrelated basis of factors that influence organizational

commitment (Karsh, 2005; Whitener, 2001). Karsh et al. (2005) argued that factors such

as satisfaction and commitment have received so much attention within organizations

because they have been found to predict employee turnover intentions in the workplace.

Karsh et al. contended that leadership dynamics, work overload, age, and employee

tenure have also shown an effect on satisfaction and commitment.

The research thus far has shown a relationship between job satisfaction and

employee behaviors including job involvement and organizational commitment.

Organizational outcomes have also been linked to an employee’s behaviors and attitudes.

Specifically, when an organization demonstrated and promoted high commitment

practices, it increased the overall organizational effectiveness. Employees who work in

organizations where high commitment practices are modeled, they were more likely to

become more involved in the organization; thus, working harder and making personal

contributions to the organization’s primary goal (Whitener, 2001).

This study adds to the existing body of research of employee organizational

commitment. Much of the research spans over the past 40 years has focused on

commitment among business personnel in the private sector (Karsh et al., 2005).

However, there are few current studies that have explored attitudinal workplace outcomes

among educators. Specifically, there was no study found that focused its attention on

educators in the public sector at all levels of education. Moreover, various studies

indicated conflicting workplace outcomes. It was expected that this study would help

clarify and identify workplace perceptions, behavioral, and attitudinal outcomes that

impact organizational commitment. As organizations identified factors that directly effect

employee commitment behavior, they would have the opportunity to develop

organizational programs to address highlighted issues as they indeed impact the overall

functioning and success of the organization.

A limited amount of research has been conducted to examine organizational

commitment across various levels of education. This study was intended to promote

positive social change, regardless of the education level being taught. It would provide

empirical data that would implicate factors directly related to employee organizational

commitment. Based on the information provided by this study, educational systems

would have the opportunity to enhance, revise, and implement programs and practices

based on direct employee feedback. Consideration of employee feedback is likely to

indicate organizational value, acceptance, and promote employee indebtedness.

Educational organizations would benefit from this indebteness as employees demonstrate

loyalty, scholarship, quality social exchanges as evidenced by significant educator

commitment. Armed with specific indicators of organizational commitment; eductional

systems could strive towards creating a professional environment that promoted personal

growth, leadership, collaborative and citizenship behaviors, and scholarship within their

organization and identifies specific factors that influence organizational commitment.

Moreover, educational organizations would have an opportunity to increase educator

moral, the quality of educator instruction, and ultimately,improve student academic

outcomes. It has been found that employees trust in leadership that had the strongest

impact on building organizational commitment (Whitener, 2001).

Chapter Summary

Thus far, there are many factors that have been considered to help explain an

employee’s level of commitment to a given organization. While some constructs have

been identified, there are variables that warrant deeper insight and exploration including:

an employee’s perception about his or her supervisor’s level of support, job satisfaction,

and job involvement (Afza, 2006; Blau, 1964; Chang & Choi, 2007; Collier & Esteban,

2007). In order to increase workforce productivity and success, organizations are taking a

closer look and the social dynamics of organizations that are likely to impact the

organizations overall effectiveness (Abbott et al., 2006; Caselman & Brandt, 2007;

Feather & Rauter, 2004). To shed further light on factors impacting organizational

commitment, more organizations and behavioral scientist are examining attitudinal

variables to help improve organizational cohesion, economic and interpersonal success

within organizations (Baron, Hannan, & Burton, 2001; Jancic & Zabkar, 2002; Karrasch,

2003; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002).

While organizational success often depends on workplace productivity, research

indicated a greater degree of success depends on interpersonal and workplace variables

such as supervisor and subordinate rapport, collaborative work teams, perceived

organizational support, and workplace communication (Abbott et al., 2006; Amerikaner,

Elliot, & Swank, 1998; Bragg, 2002; Caselman & Brandt, 2007; Chen & Hung, 2006).

There were few studies conducted examining attitudinal variables that impact

organizational commitment among educators on all academic levels. The purpose of this

study was to investigate whether or not job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support, are predictors of organizational commitment. The results of this

study provided useful data for organizations to further examine and cultivate a more

satisfied, involved, supported, and committed workforce.

Chapter 2 provides a review of research related to job satisfaction, job

involvement, perceived organizational support, and organizational commitment from the

social exchange and member exchange theoretical perspectives. Chapter 3 reports the

methodology used to examine the variables of the study. Included were a detailed

description of the settings, participants, test instruments, and method of data collection.

Chapter 4 presents the results of the quantitative study, which used a hierarchical,

multiple regressions to answer the major research question and examine the study’s

hypotheses. Specifically, is an employee’s level of organizational commitment influenced

by his or her job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived organizational support.

Chapter 5 discusses the results, and the comparison of those results to previous studies,

and the limitations of the current study. The outcome of the study expected to produce

results that would support recommendations for not only organizational settings in

general, but specifically organizational commitment and implications for social change in

educational organizations.

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

This study examined whether or not there is a relationship between job

satisfaction, job involvement, perceived organizational support, and employee

organizational commitment among educators. Several databases were used to collect data

for this study including: EBSCO host and EBSCOhost Electronic Journals, Business

Source Premier, Academic Search Premier, ERIC, Emerald. The key terms searched

included: organizational behavior, organizational commitment, perceived organization

support, employee satisfaction, tenure, gender, and job involvement to examine the

literature related factors that impact organizational commitment. Based upon past and

current literature on the subject, there are numerous reasons for further study. Previous

studies have examined organizational commitment in the medical and industrial

professions (Afza, 2003; Makanjee et al., 2006; Neves & Caetano, 2006; Vanderberghe et

al., 2007). Prior to this study, few studies have examined contributory factors of

organizational commitment within educational settings. Furthermore, no studies

examined specifically the three independent variables chosen for this study. This chapter

presents an in depth review of pertinent literature. The Social Exchange theory and the

Leader-Member Exchange theory (LMX) together provided the theoretical framework

used to examine the relationship between job satisfaction, job involvement and perceived

organizational support (POS) as predicators of organizational commitment.

Theoretical Framework of the Study

Social exchange is a primary determinate that drives, mediates, and influences job

satisfaction, perceived organizational support, and job involvement within organizations

(Blau, 1964; Chen et al., 2007; Deluga, 1994; Locke, 1976; Neves & Caetano, 2006;

Nord, 2001). The social exchange and the leader-member exchange theories were used to

examine to what extent these factors, if any, influenced an employee’s level of

organizational commitment. Fuller, Barnett, Hester, and Relyea (2003) argued that

researchers continue to find a consistent relationship between perceived organizational

support and perceived supervisor support, a variation of perceived organizational support,

and organizational commitment. The employer/employee interaction is often examined in

comparison with the social exchange theory because mutual exchange is an expected

outcome in committed relationships.

The social exchange theory proposes that behaviors are driven by reciprocity and

expectation of rewards (Blau, 1964). This may involve emotional, social, and material

benefits. Similarly, the leader-member exchange theory focuses on the quality of

exchange between the employee and manager. Specifically, it focuses on the individual's

level of emotional support and exchange resources (Wayne, Shore, Bommer, & Tetrick,

2002).

Literature on leadership and social norms suggested that social norms are

constructed, displayed, and managed in the context of various social roles, organizational

membership, and identities (Fox & Fallon, 2003).

Social roles are also motivated by

certain primary drives, including basic needs of safety and belonging. Nord (2001)

posited that these needs permit individuals to be shaped into social beings by their

experiences in significant social settings and it is argued that through the shaping process

that the social exchange occurs.

Social Exchange Theory

As social, economic, and environmental changes began to occur in the U.S. at

large, businesses began to take center stage and leaders across various industries

including automotive, oil, factory, and the housing markets began to take a closer look at

what it would take for these industries to survive in the transformation of social reform.

Blau (1964) suggested that most social interactions involve some level of social or

economic exchange. More specifically, an institutional exchange may include the

establishment of a bond where both parties engaged in the interaction seek satisfactory

outcomes at some point in time. Benefits received from an exchange relationship are

often valued as symbols of supportiveness and the exchange itself represents the

underlining mutual support, which often is a concern for all involved parties. According

to Blau, the social exchange theory further suggested that gratitude and appreciation may

come as material benefits; however, likewise, verbal expressions in some instances have

also proven invaluable for many employees.

Social Exchange and Employment Compensation. Settoon, Bennett, and Liden

(1996) contended that the social exchange model has been a helpful framework used to

enlighten organizations on subordinate behaviors including obligation to their supervisors

and engagement in job performances beyond their formal contract. Settoon et al. also

argued that employment contracts would vary in terms of the compensation, work details,

and requirements of exchange between the employee and employer. However,

employee’s who were under a contract with an organization regardless of their level of

work involvement were still expected to contribute to the organization’s success.

The basic premise of the exchange model suggests that in an exchange, if both

parties are satisfied with the outcome received, it is likely that both parties would provide

more of their own effort, with the hope of influencing the other party to reciprocate what

is being given to avoid indebtedness to the other party (Blau, 1964). It is mutuality

implied that an exchange must develop along dimensions to which both parties can

contribute and find valuable (Dienesch & Liden, 1986).

Social change theory involves multiple actors. Lawler and Thye (1999) stated,

“The social exchange theory assumed that self-interested actors transact with other self-

interested actors to accomplish individual goals they could not achieve alone” (p. 217).

Fox and Fallon (2003) further argued that an increase in relative beneficial power

increases feelings of satisfaction, security, loyalty, and commitment, while, a decrease in

relative power, leads to fear and anxiety. The actors involved with the application of the

theory will react either positively or negatively.

Social Exchange and Employee Interpersonal Behaviors. Fox and Fallon (2003),

Jancic & Zabkar (2002), and Lawler and Thye (1999) suggested that at the foundation of

the social exchange theory, a social exchange interaction asserted emotionality, a primary

force that influences the social exchange process. Every organization creates its own set

of social norms to guide the day-to-day operations of the organization. Some

organizational norms are guided by organizational behavior, culture, procedures, and

policies, while other organizational norms are influenced by emotions (Fox & Fallon,

2003; Jancic & Zabkar, 2002; Lawler & Thye, 1999).

The exchange component of the social exchange theory asserted a reciprocal element

that must be present in order for negotiations to advance. Specifically, the reciprocal

relationship suggested a joint effort as both self-interested parties enter into an agreement

based upon specified terms, obligations, with the expectation of satisfactory negotiated

outcomes (Fox & Fallon, 2003; Jancic & Zabkar, 2002; Lawler & Thye, 1999). Lawler

and Thye (1999) suggested that in each case, the exchange is a joint task in which both

actors have an incentive to accomplish or consummate the interaction in some legitimate

way.

The interactions of the social exchange process could produce pride, commitment,

dedication, esteem, and productivity; however, based on research findings, exchange

relations are more likely to endure if there promotion of mutual trust and respect were

present. Moreover, as the needs of both self-interested actors are satisfied, greater

compliance, obligation, sacrifice, and collective action would be enacted to support the

social exchange process (Lawler & Thye, 1999; Mauer et al., 2002). An exchange

relationship is an investment where involved parties must trust the other involved party to

make an equitable commitment. The exchange process is considered a partnership that

would offer an advantageous opportunity that would further deepen bonds of trust and

indebtedness. As the stability of the relationship improved each person who initially sets

out to serve their own self-interest would begin to make contributions that would prove

mutually beneficial, rewarding, and acceptable for everyone involved.

Trust as a Tenet of the Social Exchange Interaction. Another tenet at the

foundation of the social exchange theory is trust. Blau (1964) suggested that an initial

problem in social relationships is proving oneself trustworthy. Neves and Caetano (2006)

conducted research to clarify the role trust plays in organizational change. Research

findings asserted that an employee’s trust in their supervisor has a positive correlation to

affective commitment. A high level of trust between an employee and his or her

supervisor enhanced the quality of the employee and supervisor exchange, ultimately

leading to increased organizational commitment (Neves & Caetano, 2006). Trust has an

effect on not only interpersonal relationships in general, but it also affected employee

attitudes towards an organization. Trust is not an interpersonal variable easily earned,

making the loss of trust a significant issue for many workplace settings.

Druckman (1998) found that unwavering trust in a relationship is central to

moving a relationship forward. If one partner in the engagement finds mistrust, it would

be difficult for the other partner to make the first concession. When both partners are

committed and find the relationship mutually beneficial, a strengthened relationship can

be expected. Nord (2001) asserted that for any social system, including organizations to

maintain its stability, Specific behaviors must be normalized to confirm expectations.

Specifically, organizationally normed behaviors that take place should occur frequently,

and must provide rewards for both the giver and recipient.

The literature continues to note that the exchange process is rarely defined by one

single factor. This is especially true of the social exchange process that occurs between

an individual and an organization (Blau, 1964; Coyle-Shapiro & Conway, 2005; Fuller et

al., 2003). Blau (1964) suggested that people’s behaviors are often influenced by

economics, benefits, rewards, and social obligations, which may directly impact

employee: trust, internalized norms, risk, rejection, and the character of the relationship.

Application of Social Exchange Theory to Organizational Commitment. Coyle-

Shapiro and Conway (2005) mentioned that over the past 2 decades, researchers have

primarily selected the social exchange theory as the theoretical framework applied to

organizational settings because it provided useful insight of key factors that impact the

relationship between individuals and organizations. Blau (1964), Lawler and Thye

(1999), and Wayne et al. agreed that additional factors including trust, support, gratitude,

personal obligation, personal rewards, benefits, discretionary behaviors, and reciprocity

among individuals in the organization also impacted the social exchange process in the

workplace. The examination of social exchange and its relationship to behaviors has

proven to be a significant element of organizational commitment and perceptions of

organizational support. Settoon et al. (1996) argued that the social exchange model has

been used to explain the dynamics of subordinates obligation to their supervisors and and

explaination of employees peforming in ways that are beyond their general job

description. When an employee benefits from his or her employment contract, he or she

were more likely to feel more obligated to the organization.

The investigation of the role organizations and members’ play together is an

important one that involves interactions, workplace performances, and pro-organizational

behaviors. In the exchange that occurs between supervisor and subordinate, it is

important to note the effect of social positions. The social status of the subordinate versus

the social position of the supervisor, often impacts workplace relationship outcomes

(Fuller et al., 2003). Literature related to organizations further suggested that as

subordinates felt more valued and supported, relative power was more likely to increase

feelings of security (Fuller et al., 2003). This results in reinforcing the employee’s overall

commitment to the organization.

Social Exchange in Organization Developmental Process. Nord (2001) showed

that the degree of personal involvement is another factor that influences the social

exchange process. In contrast to traditional norms of the exchange theory, Nord argued

that some employees function in an organization not for monetary gain or tangible

accolades, but chose to contribute to the organization for reasons associated with personal

values such as wisdom and virtue. There are employees who function within

organizations for personal growth and they may not be committed to the organization for

social gain. From their perspective, personal satisfaction is the pay off which in many

cases also proved beneficial for the organization (Nord, 2001). Druckman (1998), Fuller

et al., (2003), Jancic and Zabkar (2002), and Mauer et al., (2002) asserted this outcome

further supported the foundation of the social exchange theory, which purports that

negative or positive behaviors are likely to occur on the basis of an exchange either

tangible or intangible.

Relative to organizations, when individuals work together as a group with a

common goal, eventually group norms are established to regulate and limit the exchange

process including the norm of reciprocity. When members of the group fail to fulfill

obligations, they may be vulnerable to administrative recourse (Blau, 1964; Blau &

Meyer, 1987). Through reciprocation, each party has an opportunity to reinforce and

stabilize the relationship by exchange, while continuing to receive needed services (Blau,

1964; Blau & Meyer, 1987). Because of the expectations of both the individual and

organization, satisfaction was a factor that could impact both parties level of commitment

to the other engaged party. The social exchange involved unspecified obligations. When

an exchange occurred it was expected that in the future, at an unspecified time, the favor

of an equal or fair exchange, would be received. Blau (1964) mentioned that the returned

favor cannot be bargained about, but must be left up to the discretion of the party who is

returning the favor. This component of the social exchange process could be especially

difficult in organizational settings. Employees are often forced to trust and rely on their

immediate superiors prior discretion and rewards because is it is assumed that their

response would ultimately represent the organizations overall support and commitment to

the employee.

Social Exchange, Workplace Perceptions, and Shared Values. Mauer et al. (2002)

asserted that the supervisor-subordinate exchanges do have distinct antecedents and

consequences. Because subordinates view organizational support as indicative of

organizational support, it is important that the exchange between the subordinate and

supervisor is nurtured and perceived as beneficiary. More specifically, when an employee

completes a task for a supervisor, while the task may benefit the supervisor, there may be

possible secondary and unintended benefits to the organization at large. This further

highlighted the concept of perceived beneficiary support, which may have a direct effect

on an employee’s perceptions and workplace behaviors (Mauer et al., 2002). For

developmental activities to be beneficial to the employee, supervisor, and organization,

activities should be based on the assessment of what will be most valued by the members

of the organization. Mauer et al. found that when an employee’s perception of

organizational support was high, employees were more likely to engage in developmental

activities that were perceived to benefit the employee themselves, a supervisor, and or the

organization as a part of the social exchange process.

Druckman (1998) argued that to ensure quality exchanges, organizations and

employees alike must not only contribute to the relationship based on self-interest, but

also maintain the quality of the interaction based on shared values and mutual needs. The

interactions included attributed intentions, perceptions of relative power, legitimacy, and

perceptions of fair treatment of other employees. In the analysis of the social exchange

theory, Druckman emphasized the distinction of interpretations related to the term

exchange. For example, exchanges may be interpreted as a trade for one party and as a

relationship for the other party involved. This difference in interpretation could have

significant implications for the outcome of the existing interaction. Furthermore,

Druckman argued that when the intended messages were clear and there are no

underlining political gains, it was likely to induce cooperative behaviors. It was argued

that an increase in mutual beneficial power, feelings of satisfaction, security, loyalty, and

commitment, while, a decrease in mutual power leads to fear and anxiety (Fox & Fallon,

2003).

Tangible and Social Benefits of Social Exchanges Within Organizations. Rhoades

and Eisenberger (2002) indicated that social exchange theorists contended that when

individuals are acknowledged and rewarded for a job well done he or she would be more

likely to repeat the behavior in the future and make even greater contributions for the

good of the group on behalf of the organization. This type of response supported the idea

that when employees feel that actions of the organization is based on sincere, voluntary,

and unconditional regard and respect, it was likely that the employee would be more

willing to make positive contributions to the good of the organization. Promotions, job

enrichment and training based on internal evaluations instead of external constraints like

governmental regulations, ensuring that the exchange being offered on the part of the

organization is not only supportive, but also genuine.

The exchanges that occur in the workplace between the subordinate and

supervisor are a critical part of the organizations core interactions and success. When the

leader provided the employee with approval, recognition, and support, the employee in

turn made a considerable contribution to the relationship by submitting commitment,

devotion, and expertise, not only to the supervisor, but to the overall organization.

Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002). Deluga (1994), Jancic and Zabkar (2002), Valle and

Witt (2001) indicated that as the exchange occurred and each party was deemed satisfied,

both parties more willing to reciprocate with the equal or even greater efforts. During

exchange transactions, each participant hoped to gain the greatest benefit while making

the least contribution. In order to provide a mutually beneficial exchange, both

participants must agree on the terms of the exchange (Blau, 1964). Where each party has

self-interest, the exchange process allows for interactions, actions, and bidirectional

opportunities that moved towards equitable transactions. Blau (1964) asserted that it is

perceptions and expectations that would ultimately impact the employee’s level of

organizational commitment. Marcus and House (1973) in agreement with Blau suggested

that the social exchange theory is based on social psychological assumptions which were

cognitive formulas based on a person’s perception and evaluation of behavior shows to

them.

Numerous summaries of the social exchange theory suggested a limitation of the

exchange model. The limitation was linked to the fact that each exchange relationship

would vary based on the uniquely affective behaviors and attitudes of the social exchange

outcomes (Druckman, 1998; Jancic & Zabkar, 2002; Settoon et al., 1996; Rhoades &

Eisenberger, 2002).

Settoon et al. (1996) argued that employees benefit from resources and support from

exchange relationships. Likewise, organizations benefited from employee attitudes and

behaviors associated with quality workplace exchanges. Furthermore, this complex

notion implied that changing employee attitudes and behaviors were not a simple task,

but may be necessary to impact employee commitment.

Leader-Member Exchange Theory

The leader-member exchange theory (LMX) is a derivative of the social

exchange model. Although very similar, the LMX theory specifically relates to

organizational behaviors by examining specific antecedents. These include: treatment by

the organization, justice, fairness, and help explain the long-term benefits of quality

leader-member exchanges within organizations (Wayne et al., 2002).

Kacmar et al. (2003) suggested that according to the LMX theory, supervisors

determined the work roles of their subordinates. Moreover, those roles were based on the

supervisor’s perception of an employee’s ability, past performance, and the quality of

exchange relationship between the supervisor and employee. Diensch and Liden (1986)

demonstrated that a person’s immediate supervisor and their position, as overseer could

also be an influential role-sender; a supervisor typically enforced role expectations on

behalf of the organization.

The Leader Member Exchange as a Multidimensional Construct. The LMX

theory cannot be explained by one single action or concept. The leader-member exchange

is often considered multi-dimensional because it focuses on three primary outcomes:

perceived contributions, loyalty, and affect. An employee’s perceived contribution is

demonstrated by individual work efforts that are in line with the goals and efforts of the

organization. Loyalty is a workplace outcome that can be identified as one’s public

expression of the leader member exchange relationship. This expression is often

exemplified by affection and positive interpersonal exchanges among organizational

members (Dienesh & Liden, 1986).

Dienesch and Liden (1986) found that a critical element of the LMX theory is the

nature of the relationship between leader and subordinate, which often developed through

a role identification process. Furthermore, the better the quality of the exchange, the more

likely the subordinate would be entrusted with more significant roles, privileges, and

rewards; hence, support within the workplace setting (Kacmar et al., 2003). A consistent

body of LMX research showed that LMX was positively related to job satisfaction and

organizational commitment. Furthermore, the exchange that occurs should be mutually

satisfying through an on going process for both self-interested participants (Abbott et al.,

2006; Dienesch, & Liden, 1986).

In a study conducted by Wayne et al. (2002) they examined the role of fair

treatment and rewards in industrial plant employees’ perceptions of organizational

support and leader member exchange of two metal fabricating plants. Wayne et al.’s

research findings demonstrated that contingent rewards were positively correlated to the

employee and supervisor leader member exchange process. Consistent with past research,

Wayne et al. also suggested that the LMX is intended to fulfill the exchange relationship

between subordinate and supervisor rather than the subordinate and organization. This

outcome reiterated the importance of the quality leader-member exchange. Primarily, the

LMX theory implied that as organizational representatives and direct overseers,

supervisors act as visible “gatekeepers” (Abbott et al., 2006).

The research also concluded that POS did impact the leader-member exchange, but

LMX did not have an effect on POS (Wayne et al., 2002). In support of previous

research studies, this demonstrated that POS and LMX do share similar characteristics,

but are two distinct social exchange processes. Moreover, both POS and LMX may

influence the development of social exchange relationships among administrators and

direct supervisors; thus, inherently influencing levels of affective commitment and

organizational citizenship behaviors. Wayne et al. asserted a significant limitation of this

study was that it was conducted in a single industrial plant, limiting its findings the ability

to be generalized to other organizations.

The Importance of the Quality of Leader Member Exchange. Research suggested that

it is the quality of the relationship that affects employee performance, well-being,

material rewards and benefits, and social support interactions between the supervisor and

subordinate (Abbott et al., 2006; Dienesch & Liden, 1986; Wayne et al., 2002). In a study

conducted by Erdogan et al. (2002) they examined the match between the organization’s

values and the employee’s values and work attitudes as a moderator of the leader-

member exchange. They found that teachers working in 30 public schools in Istanbul,

Turkey reported that “person organizational fit” was positively related to job satisfaction

when LMX was low, but was not related to job satisfaction when LMX was high.

Erdogan et al.’s research findings further supported the significance of the LMX to the

organization’s social exchange process (Erdogan et al., 2002). Hofmann et al. (2003)

asserted that because of the potential conflict and multiple roles that are present in

organizations, the quality of leader-member exchange could influence citizenship

behaviors and the safety climate of the organization. The research on LMX further

suggested that because the LMX theory was designed in likeness of the social exchange

theory it too emphasized the outcome of high quality relationships. Specifically when

there is a high quality exchange and organizational roles are clearly defined, thus positive

behavioral outcomes emerge as evidence (Hofmann et al., 2003; Settoon et al., 1996).

Because of the apparent significance of social exchanges in the organization whether

based on the LMX or the original social exchange theory, Hofmann et al. argued that

more studies are needed to investigate how social exchanges develop over time and

impact workplace outcomes.

Early models of the leader-member exchange theory contended that compatibility

between the leader and the member was one of the most important factors in the

exchange relationship. However, Dienesch and Liden (1986) saw a need to further

investigate under which conditions would a nurturing relationship between employee and

supervisor most likely develop and effect positive exchange. Specifically, they proposed

a model to enhance the LMX theory. This model highlights the importance of the early

interactions between the subordinate and supervisor. If the initial relationship was strong

based on personality characteristics, attitudes, and abilities, it was expected to impact the

quality and nature of the relationship that will develop in the leader and member

exchange (Dienesch & Liden, 1986; Steiner, 2001).

Application of the Leader-Member Exchange Theory. Deluga (1994) contended

that from an i

nteractionist approach, the LMX theory is a suitable explanation of the

mutually beneficial transaction that occurs between subordinates and supervisors.

According to Hofmann and Morgeson (1999) and Hofmann, Morgeson and Gerras

(2003), employees considered high-quality LMX relationships as “pay back” and “pay

back” is typically in a fashion that is both beneficial to the supervisors and organization

on a whole. Moreover, the employee’s behaviors within the exchange are similar to

expectations and behaviors valued within their specific workplace setting. As new

employees enter the workplace, supervisors must orient new members to the workplace;

making clear role expectations, support resources, formal sanctions, policies and

procedures. An orientation must not only be done for a specified work area, but the

organization overall. Dienesch and Liden (1986) argued that this orientation would

compliment the interpersonal exchange, which would likely influence the role the

employee is expected to fulfill in a given workplace. While the LMX focuses on roles in

the leader-member exchange, it is also important to note that different personality types

leader’s perceived level of power, the organization’s polices, and culture influences the

quality of exchanges between subordinate and supervisor. Erdogan et al. (2002) asserted

that supervisors develop different types of relationships with each individual subordinate.

It must be noted that most supervisors do not treat all employees equally (Erdogan et al.,

2002; Mueller & Lee, 2002).

Benefits of the Differences in Leader Member Exchanges. The current literature

reported various explanations for the differences in treatment from one subordinate to

another. In general, the research suggested that each member makes a unique contribution

to the organization. In many cases, a supervisor was likely to entrust task, and

responsibilities based on previous work performances, the quality of the leader-member

exchange, the employee’s skills and abilities, and the need of the presenting task

(Truckenbrodt, 2000).

Graen (1976) argued that time constraints and pressures of the workforce can

explain a difference in treatment among employees. Moreover, Graen proposed that time

urgency can force a leader to develop a close relationship with a limited number of

members as they work towards the goal of a specific task. Steiner (2001) contended that

supervisors usually developed significant relationships with a limited number of

subordinates. Nonetheless the connection developed proved invaluable as supervisors

depended on small work groups to help communicate and focus attention towards

accomplishing specific tasks within the organization. Indeed, the supervisor-subordinate

relationship has its advantage in that the supervisor has prior working knowledge of

subordinates skills, strengths, weakness, merit, and reliability. Steiner asserted that

subordinates in these exclusive exchanges are given more autonomy and responsibility.

In a study examining the value of perception in Leader-member exchange, Steiner

focused on the role of values in supervisor-subordinate relationships. The study found

that subordinates make inferences about their relationship with their supervisor based on

shared interactions. If the supervisor’s behaviors were supportive towards the

subordinate, the subordinate’s perception of the supervisor is likely to impact positive

work behaviors, attributions, and organizational role outcomes (Dienesch & Liden, 1986;

Steiner, 2001).

Advantages of Quality Leader Member Exchanges in Organizations. Dienesch

and Liden (1986) asserted that supervisors possess organizational power, autonomy, and

other resources that afforded them the opportunity to relate to each member of the

organization in a unique manner. It was understood that if immediate supervisors have a

low quality relationship with their own supervisor their subordinates would perceive their

autonomy and organizational power as low. Based on the empirical usefulness of the

leader-exchange model of leadership, Dienesch and Liden argued that the LMX model

deserves continued study and has often been overlooked as a valuable explanation of

behaviors in the workforce; specifically because the model has been oversimplified in its

present state of development. Moreover, extensive research should be conducted using

additional theory to help provide descriptive insight into the dynamics of the relationship

and the leader and member in the exchange process.

According to Truckenbrodt (2000) there are two types of organizational

members, an in-group and an out-group. The in-group is defined as members who

perform their job according to the employment contract and who work additionally

beyond their contact through volunteer projects and activities. In-group employees also

demonstrated unsolicited positive citizenship behaviors and activities with or without the

supervisor’s request. Research showed that in-group members were more likely to

receive additional support and recognition from their supervisors when compared to out-

group subordinates. Out-group subordinates were described as employees who only

performed their contracted employment duties as assigned. Truckenbrodt suggested that

out-group employees are likely to report decreased reciprocal trust and organizational

support.

Moreover, when comparing the advantages of in-group versus out-group

employees, it was clear that in-group status was more advantageous not only for the

organization, but also for the employee and supervisor alike. Specifically, the research

showed that mutual trust; loyalty, support, job satisfaction, and positive LMX exchanges

were factors that have been found to impact employee commitment (Dienesch & Liden,

1986; Truckenbrodt, 2000).

Research conducted by Truckenbrodt (2000) suggested that future research

explore if gender differences affect leader-member exchange employment tenure, and

age. The differences may influence an employee’s sense of commitment, involvement,

and other interpersonal behaviors in the workplace setting.

Deluga (1994) suggested that the LMX exchange theory within organizations

represents a two-way engagement that could be mutually satisfying. In a study conducted

to examine supervisor trust building, LMX, and its impact on organizational citizenship

behaviors, he found that in high exchanges supervisors and subordinates alike enjoy

advantageous rewards such as positive performance appraisals, promotions, and

beneficial rewards. In addition, the research findings suggested that perceived fairness

and LMX quality was positively related to employee organizational citizenship behaviors

(Deluga, 1994).

Almost a decade later, Muller and Lee (2002) argued that it is the interactions in

higher quality LMX that accounts for the dramatic differences in not only perceptions,

but also in the actual exchanges between a supervisor and employee. Because LMX is

viewed as an internal social system that functions interdependently, each independent

portion of the system affects the outcome of each of the interdependent parts.

The Importance of Quality Leader Member Exchanges. Several studies have

emphasized the importance of quality of exchanges and its impact on favorable

outcomes. Specifically, Muller and Lee (2002) asserted that “Interactions indicative of

high quality LMX’s represented positive communication exchanges where employee’s

are likely to possesses greater trust, confidence, attention, and access to “insider”

organizational information and without fear of supervisory or administrative sanctions”

(p. 235). A serious limitation of this study is that the majority of the respondents were

white females, with at least a four year degree, who worked in non-profit organizations;

therefore, these finding cannot be generalized to a gender or ethnically diverse population

or for profit organizations.

Muller and Lee (2002) asserted that the leader member exchange often has a

rippled effect regarding an employee’s perception of administrative communications. It is

further argued that because supervisors have an opportunity to influence communication

satisfaction, perceptions, and have a vested interest in the overall well-being of the

organization, supervisors should create opportunities to develop and maintain higher

exchanges with as many employees as possible (Blau, 1964; Hofmann & Morgeson,

1999; Muller & Lee, 2002; Truckenbrodt, 2000).

As the current literature provided evidence of the leader-member exchange as a

social system with all of its respective parts; supervisors and subordinates alike would be

more inclined to contribute more liberally to a mutually rewarding, productive, social

system exchange. Settoon et al. (1996) argued that a problem significantly affecting many

leader member exchanges is the leader’s subjective assessment of the subordinates’

behavior. In review of the literature related to the LMX model, scholars continued to

suggest that future research should examine the role of mentorship and its possible

relationship to the leader-member exchange. In addition, further close examination of

specific antecedents that impact the exchange developmental process between leaders and

members.

Perceived Organizational Support

The current literature related to organization development repeatedly brought

attention to pervieved organization support (POS) as a predictor of organizational

commitment. According to Makanjee et al. (2006) perceived organizational support is

described as an organization’s commitment to its employees. Makanjee et al. contended

that POS is the support an employee recieved from the employer to assist them in

completing a required task effectively. Because of the scope, similarity in construct, and

definition; it was beneficial to report the research findings related to POS and perceived

superviors support (PSS) for this study. The literature related to organizational behaviors

over the past three decades have identified perceived organizational support as an

attitudinal type of perceived organiztional support (Idsoe, 2006; Nicholson, 2003).

Because much of the literature over the past 20 years has focused primarly on

POS and not PSS as a predictor of organizational commitment, this examination was

considered a useful contribution to the body of literature by expanding the knowledge of

whether or not PSS indeed had an effect on an employee’s level of commitment to the

organization. There were no recent studies disputing the relationship between

organizational support and organizational commitment. However, in a study conducted

by Kidd and Smewing (2001) they concluded that organizational support was unrelated to

career identity or career planning. Locke( 1976) found that “The most useful lesson to be

gleaned from attributional studies of social perception is the importance of distinguishing

between one’s own view of one’s actions and the observer’s view of those actions” (p.

887). Similary, Afza (2003) argued that power is a central tenet of the supervisor

subordinate relationship. Afza examined supervisor-subordinate relationships and

satisfaction in Indian Samll Business Enterprises. In workplace settings it was expected

that supervisors would enforce rules by using his or her authority to influence employees

to complete their workplace duties. Afza’s research findings contended that performance

focused, reward, expert, and referent power bases of the leaders are very instrumental in

in directing employee organizational commitment. The research acknowledged that much

of the research related to job satisfaction and supervisor-subordinate relationships has

been conducted in the United States. Therefore, the findings asserted by Afza are limited

to small business and enterprises within the Indian culture and further emperical studies

were recommended.

Perceived Support and Subordinate Role Behaviors. Research on leadership

behaviors indicated that the relationship between the leader and subordinate is

significantly influenced by subordinate role behaviors. Behaviors related to

organizational commitment included an employee’s attitude and disposition. Previously,

Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) conducted an extensive literature review of more than

70 studies examing related factors that may have contributed to perceived organizational

support. This study concluded that postive organizational support had a strong postive

relationship to organizational commitment and continuance commitment, a small

negative relationship to organizational commitment. These findings suggested that

employees with perceived organizational support (POS) were more likely to report their

job as more enjoyable, were more likely to be in a better mood at work, and experienced

fewer psychosomatic complaints such as stress, anxiety, and headaches. O’Driscoll et al.

(2003) found that by investgating organizational and work-family conflict, perceptions of

the organization as family supportive and organizational support were issues related to

employee satsifaction and organizational commitment.

Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) research findings were useful to organizations

because they gave a specfic data related to perceived organizational support for over

more than 40 years. In addition, it confirmed earlier studies conducted and continues to

reflect current reseach findings related to the value of the relationship between perceived

organizational support and organizational commitment. Rhoades and Eisenberger

analysis of the research related to perceived organizational support, concluded that the

direction of exisitng and future research should be directed towards factors that may

influence amd mediate the relationship of POS and outcomes that benefit employees and

the existing organization. Consequently, they did not suggest future research regarding

perceived organizational support and its relationship to workplace outcomes.

Makanjee et al. (2006) examined the effects of perceived organizational support

on organizational commtiment among diagnostic radiograhers in South Africa. They

were interested in examing POS because of recent implications of its relationship to

employee turnover, client safety, and the quality of care rendered to patients. Makanjee et

al. argued that POS has been found to be related to many factors including: commitment,

leader-member exchange, organizational support, and job satisfaction. The study’s

research findings revealed that employee’s form a general assumption regarding the

organiztions treatment and commitment to the individual. Furthermore, they asserted that

there are four general types of perceived support relevant to organizational outcomes

including: fairness, organizational support, organizational rewards and job conditions.

Specifically, the findings of this study indicated that the negatively affected radiographers

were not involved in the decision making processes, top management decisions were not

clearly communicated to direct care providers, and most radiographers felt that

management had no interest in their well-being of their employees. Moreover, Makanjee

et al. revealed that the radiographers perceived that their performance was unfairly

appraised, their promotion procedures were unfairly applied, their good acheivements

unrecognized and their pay was not comparable to the average salary in the current job

market. Because a radiographer’s perception of support was often dependent on day to

day interactions, employees typically focused feedback and treatment of their direct

supervisor as indicative of upper management (Makanjee et al., 2006). Employee’s often

assumed the direct supervisor’s response is refelective of the organiztion as a whole

(Makanjee et al.,; Neves & Caetano, 2006). Neves and Caetano conducted a study

examining the social exchange process among factory workers and found that the more

employees trust their supervisor, the more affectively committed to the organization they

were likely to be. The study reinforced the concept that employee perceptions of

organizational support and interpersonal justice influenced affective commitment by first

being influenced by an employee’s level of trust in his or her supervisor.

In support of the research findings, Neves and Caetano (2006) and Makanjee et al.

(2006) admitted that there were still many unanswered questions regarding all the factors

that impact the complex interlocking relationship between a supervisor and subordinate.

Makanjee et al recommended that organizations promote employee professional growth,

provide market salary compensation, and employees should not only be rewarded for

continued education, but also be given opportunities to implement knowledge gained

from such opportunities. In addition, management could benefit from changing their

management style from authorative to participative management. Neves and Caetano

suggested that based on their findings research related to social exchanges in the

workplace, the evidence is pointing in new directions and future research should exam

regarding the conditions under which trust seems to have a stronger impact on employee

attitudes and outcomes during times of transition.

The Effect of Changes and Perceived Support in the 21

Century Workforce. Most

recently, Van Dick, Hirst, Grojean, and Wieseke (2007) argued that there is a growing

emphasis placed on people power within organizations. In the examination of the

relationship between leader and follower identification, they found that as organizations

attempted to expand performance and employee commtiment, significant attention must

be focused on leadership, member exchange, and extra-role activities. Van Dick et al.

conducted a study which comprised of 367 school teachers and 60 head teachers in

Germany. The results of their study confirmed that persons in leadership positions did

have an effect on the organizations social norms including: employee identity,

satisfaction, attitudes, and commitment. Moreover, leader organizational identification

was directly related to follower organizational identification and group outcomes. Van

Dick et al. further suggested that their research could have been enhanced with the use of

panel surveys to track both employee attitudes and service quality over time to help draw

more solid conclusions related to employee commitment within educational settings.

Research on leadership proposed that as a role model, leaders influence group

members perceptions, values, and organizational citizenship behaviors (Abbott et al.,

2006; Nicholson, 2003). As leaders demonstrated sensitivity and positive responses to

their group members individual needs, there was an enhancement in members

satisfaction; which ultimately lead to a greater willingness for members demonstrate

extra effort on behalf of the organization at large (Van Dick et al., 2007). Likewise,

research also showed that organizational support was negatively associated with turnover,

turnover intentions, and an employee’s commitment to the organization (Brough &

Frame, 2004).

Vandeberghe et al. (2007) suggested that employees who worked in the service

industry, specifically fast-food resturants, experienced both customer commitment and

organizational commitment. Therefore, an organization’s role of support is crutial to the

quality of service provided by the employee of that organization. In a recent study

Vandeberghe et al. examined employees’ perceptions towards the organization who had

direct contact with customers within 12 fast food resturants in Blegium to determine

whether or not perceived organizational support, organizational commitment, and

commitment to customers would influence the quality of service as perceived by the

customers. The study concluded that there was no effect for normative commitment on

service quality. In contrast to the researchers prediction, the results of the study found no

significant relationship between organizational affective commitment or normative

commtiment and service quality among fast food employees. However, there was a

positive relationship between affective commitment to customers and service quality.

Vanderberghe et al. (2007) suggested that because employees worked hard to

meet the needs of their customers, focused attention should be placed on to what extent

are the organization’s goals compatiable with customer goals and expectations.

Specifically, internalizing the goals and values of an organization was not enough to

promote quality work performance among employees. Employee commitment was

strongly related to customer satisfaction and the quality of service provided to the

customer. Accordingly, when employees perceived that customers evaluated services

positively, it enabled employees to not only contribute to the goals of the workplace; but

also, to the quality of service towards customers. Ulitimately, this positive affect

contributed to the organizations productivity and success. Vandenberghe et al. suggested

that future research studies explore whether organization-customer goal compatibility

moderates the organizational affective commitment service quality relationship within

organizations.

Workplace Perceptions of Support and Employee Commitment. There were many

factors for consideration regarding workplace behaviors that influenced perceived

organizational support and an employee’s level of commitment to the organization;

including employee perception, expectation related to performance rewards, and

recognition. Nicholson (2003) argued that fulfilled expectation and rewards that are

relevant to employees might be a source of motivation that may have a significant impact

on perceptions of leadership support. It is further suggested that good managers motivate

employees by using their personal power of vision and their compelling logic of

reasoning. Nicholson concluded that when organizations provided worthwhile incentives

and rewards, it was expected that organizational members would voluntarily perform

above and beyond the organizations outlined expectations Somech and Ron (2007)

investigated organizational citizenship behaviors among educators and the influence of

individual and organizational characteristics. Research related to organizational settings

highlight the need for educators to function beyond the scope of their job description in

order to help facilitate the goals and success of the organization. Specifically, the primary

focus of a study conducted by Somech and Ron was to evaluate behaviors that surpassed

formal job requirements and relevant behaviors that were essential for the survival of the

educational institution. It is important to note as it relates to “normal” educator

interactions, teachers, particularly, often work in isolation away from supervisors and

colleagues; therefore, participating in extra role behaviors may be difficult. Although

teachers work in isolation, their likelihood to engage in organization citizenship

behaviors would be beneficial to their co-workers and the overall productivity of the

educational institution. As it relates to relationship between organizational citizenship

behaviors (OCB) and individual characteristics, Somech and Ron suggested that

organizational support and organizational value promote teachers organizational

citizenship behaviors. Namely, the following OCB’s: altruism, conscientiousness,

sportsmanship, and civic virtue; all which have been found, positively related to

perceived organizational support. These findings supported the foundational theme of the

social exchange theory. Somech and Ron found that supportive actions on the part of

school administrators encouraged beneficial reciprocity among teachers. The more

supportive teachers perceived their administration to be, the more likely they were to

show interest in job involvement activities such as making suggestions for school

improvement, attending meetings, and assisting other teachers with their outlined duties.

Finally, Somech and Ron suggested that as supervisors take a closer look at

organizational values in light of teachers voluntary OCB, they many find avenues to

teamwork interactions which should impact teacher cooperation and possibly contribute

to more organizational citizenship behaviors in educational settings.

Hofmann et al. (2003) argued that in stable work relationships, the leader and

subordinate collaboratively solve problems. Overtime, as a result of shared interactions,

the bond tightens, and both parties would attempt to provide mutually satisfying

engagement. Scholars contended that because superviors function as organizational

agents; significant interactions between the supervisor and subordinate are often

communicated to top management, further confirming an employees’ association of their

supervisor’s support as indicative of postive organizational support (Kacmar et al., 2003;

Makanjee et al., 2006; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Moreover, Makanjee et al. (2006)

indicated that supervisors are also seen as organizational agents because they have the

responsibility for directing and overseeing employee performances. In fact, because

employees realized that performance apprasials conducted by supervisors were forwarded

to the organization’s adminstration, this practice further confirmed for the employee the

organizational support being indicative of percived organizational support. Makanjee et

al. suggested that positive interactions and treatment from a supervisor was likely to

contribute to an employees perception of organizational support; ultimately, impacting an

employee’s level of organizational commitment. O’Driscoll et al. (2003) found that

employees who reported greater support from their supervisors experienced less

psychological strain, than did employees who reported lower supervisory support.

Furthermore, this study’s findings also suggested that an organizational culture that is

considered as “supportive” may be a necessary condition for reducing work-family

conflicts, dissatisfaction, and other negative effects.

In accordance with previous research, it is apparent that family sensitive policies

within organizations did have direct and indirect consequences for not only the

employee, but the organization overall. The literature consistently, highlighted the value

of perceived organizational support in relationship to organizational commitment.

Accordingly, O’Driscoll et al. (2003) affirmed that an employee’s perception of

supervisor importance was very reliable as immediate supervisors typically function as

organizational facilitators who help coordinate and carry out organization norms and

practices. They further argued that although their research findings were limited by the

reliance of self reported data, the causal relationship that was found was consistent with

previous research related to the variables examined in their study.

In contrast to previous studies, Gagon and Michael (2004) studied outcomes of

perceived superisor support among wood production employees. They found that by

developing the supervisor-subordinate relationship and management skills, organizations

could benefit significantly from improved employee attitudes and performance.

Furthermore, they suggested specific guidelines on how management could improve

workplace outcomes . Upper level management has the discretionary power to enhance

the supervisors interpersonal skills for practice including: communication, conflict

resolutin, and leadership. Indeed, if organizations promoted the idea that the success of an

organization hinges on the quality of supportive relationships within that organization,

they would further be able to make the connection clear for employees that there could be

a a productive and satisfied workforce. Nonetheless, Gagon and Michael argued that

although insightful, their research findings indicated limitations consistent with the

current leadership literature. Mainly, because the data was cross sectional and represented

employee opinnions and attitudes at a given period of time and the sample used for the

study primarily represented wood production employees in the northeastern part of the

United States.

The current literature related to workplace commitment consistently reported that

whether positive or negative, perceived organizational support could directly or indirect

affect employee morale and employer relations. Although there were many variables to

consider regarding organizational commitment, an analysis of leadership support

indicated that a stable relationship between a supervisor and subordinate is crucial.

Evidence to support notions of perceived organizational support and organizational

commitment were necessary to enhance positive interpersonal workplace interactions.

Job Involvement

In review of the current literature related to job involvement, the evidence showed

limited recent empirical support as well as, conflicting studies that showed a significant

relationship between job involvement and workplace outcomes, including organizational

commitment. This limitation further supported the rational for the investigation of the job

involvement as a possible predictor of organizational commitment. Research findings

continued to reinforce the importance of role expectations and attitudes as factors

influencing an employee’s level of job involvement. Kanungo (1982) contended that job

involvement tended to be a function of how much the job can satisfy an employee’s

immediate needs. Furthermore, job involvement refers to an employee’s psychological

connection to his or her job. In addition, he found that individuals who demonstrated high

work involvement also considered their jobs a significant part of who they are. Joiner and

Bakalis (2006) suggested that job involvement describes how interested, enmeshed, and

engrossed the worker is in the goals, culture, and tasks of a given organization.

Blau and Meyer (1987) found an interaction between job involvement and

organizational commitment to be significantly related to employee turnover regardless of

gender, tenure, and martial status utilizing the ordinary least squares regression model.

Blau and Meyer originally utilized employee categories to clarify the meaning of workers

in relation to workplace behaviors including task related efforts and withdrawal

behaviors. Specifically, employee’s who exhibited both high commitment and high job

involvement as Institutional Stars, employees with high job involvement and low

organizational commitment were identified as Lone Wolves, employees with low job

involvement and high organizational commitment who were more likely to have a strong

organizational identification, Corporate Citizens, and Apathetic represented employee’s

who possessed low job involvement and low affective commitment. (Blau & Meyer,

1987; Hafer & Martin, 2006; Wegge et al., 2007), Moreover, in the analysis of employee

categories, Hafer and Martin (2006) argued apathetic employee’s contributed the least to

workplace goals and had the tendency to act indifferent to other employees and the

organization on a whole.

More than a decade ago, Elloy, Everett, and Flynn (1995) suggested that trusting,

innovative, fair, and cohesive supervisors who positively acknowledged subordinates for

a job well done played a critical role in the nature of the workplace climate that fostered

job involvement. Furthermore, research suggested that an employee’s perception of their

organizational support was significantly related to situational and work variable

outcomes. Elloy et al. further admitted that the results of the study were overstated.

Likewise, in contrast to much of the research finding related job involvement and

organizational commitment, over a decade ago, Huselid and Day (1991) also argued an

ambiguity of the study’s results regarding the relationship between job involvement and

organizational commitment. Specifically, Huselid and Day argued that previous studies

concluded by Blau and Meyer (1987) did not include measures of continuance

commitment, but did focus on attitudinal commitment. However, Huselid and Day

asserted that neither attitudinal nor continuance commitment alone, could account for an

employee’s decision to remain with a given organization. More importantly, in

opposition to Blau and Meyer and Huselid and Day argued that the ordinary least squares

regression (OLS) model used to analyze much of the previous work related to job

involvement caused an overstatement of the relationship between job involvement and

workplace outcomes such as turnover and organizational commitment. Case in point,

when two separate methods of analysis were used to examine the relationship between

job involvement and workplace outcomes, Huselid and Day’s research yielded two very

distinct opposing outcomes. The use of the OLS model showed a significant relationship

between tenure, attitudinal commitment, and job involvement and turnover. However,

when the study was replicated using the logistic regression model no significant

relationship was found. It appeared that the research of Huselid and Day was conducted

primarily to challenge the earlier works of Blau and Meyer. They contended that their

objective was to provide a more comprehensive model and broader definition of earlier

conducted research. Other research mentioned the overgeneralization of attitudinal and

affective variables on organizational commitment. However, there were no studies found

that indicated that there was no absolute relationship found (Elloy, 1995; Huselid & Day,

1991).

More recently, Joiner and Bakalis (2006) contended that there were various

workplace antecedents that influenced an employee’s level of commitment to the

organization including: absenteeism, job performance, job involvement, tenure, personal

characteristics, organizational support, and secondary employment. Joiner and Bakalis

conducted a study examining specific antecedents of organizational commitment among

Australian post-secondary tutors. Their study found that working a second job, a

characteristic of job involvement, was associated with lower continuance and affective

commitment among post-secondary tutors.

Likewise, Idsoe (2006) investigated the predictive value of positive challenge at

work, perceived control at work, job attitudes, and their relationship to the organization

among Norwegian school counselors. Idsoe’s research findings suggested that job aspects

more preferred by the employee’s were also those that lead to the highest positive job

attitudes. Furthermore, work outcomes were related to attitudinal outcomes like the

decision to become involved in the workplace. More specifically, Idsoe examined

whether different aspects of work behavior among counselors were uniquely associated

with job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment. Idsoe sought to

examine the difference between prevention and system interventions. Based on Idsoe’s

findings, related to group member interaction task asserted that members traditionally

preferred work involvement at the systematic level. Moreover, this level provided

opportunities for more collaboration, exchanges, and feedback, among group members.

Indeed, these positive interactions were more likely to contribute to the success and

effective approach to the quality of client service delivery (Idsoe, 2006).

Idsoe (2006) and Wegge et al. (2007) argued that systematically shared tasks were

expected to increase job involvement and perceived organizational support. Although

employee’s participated in “systematic” group assignments, Idsoe argued that Norwegian

counselors who were given more autonomy to choose among methods, strategies, and

interventions based on their own discretion were more likely to be self-starters who

initiated more creative and manageable workplace outcomes. For example, when a

counselor perceived some level of control and personal discretion on work related tasks,

he or she were more likely to implement appropriate interventions. Idsoe’s research

findings strongly supported attitudinal outcomes and their relationship to organizational

commitment. The research did not investigate reciprocal effects between job content and

job attitudes as previous research had already been conducted in support of such

outcomes. Idsoe suggested further study from a longitudinal perspective to provide

greater insight into attitudinal aspects of job outcomes (Idsoe, 2006).

Hallberg and Schaufeli (2006) argued that work engagement of job involvement and

organizational commitment were factors that referred to an employee’s positive

attachment to work which also included a reciprocal efforts between an employee and the

organization. Job involvement had primarily been identified as a variable influenced by

“personal” intrinsic factors and attitudes. Hallberg and Schaufeli examined the difference

of work engagement between job involvement and organizational commitment among the

Swedish section of an international communication consulting company. The research

findings indicated a relationship between job involvement and intrinsic motivation.

However, job involvement was negatively correlated with an employee’s intention to

leave the company. Furthermore, when employees had adequate resources to complete

required tasks effectively they reported more satisfaction with their work environment. In

fact, if employees are adequately supported regarding job resources, they were more

satisfied with their job and work environment. A noteworthy deficiency of the Hallberg

and Schaufeli study was that research outcomes were limited to the Swedish culture and

or workplace environments.

Clay-Warner et al. (2005) argued that in organizations, members who were

loosely connected to the organization were less motivated to care about fair treatment and

procedural justice. Although managers often influenced employee behaviors, Hafer and

Martin (2006) argued that managers often enacted personal and organizational tactics to

encourage employees to engage in positive performances on the job that would contribute

to positive workplace outcomes. In their study, they investigated job involvement and

affective commitment and its effects on apathetic employee mobility. Sensitivity analysis,

a technique used to artificially manipulate data on significant variables was used to

examine the data. The researchers found that managers could benefit from moving

employees from the traditionally negative apathetic category towards one of the three

positive employee categories such as institutional stars, lone wolves, or corporate citizen

category. As an influential source of employee behaviors, managers could make the

difference in employee job involvement by focusing on an employee’s affective

commitment. Moreover, the importance of clear communication could never be over

emphasized in a workplace setting. Nonetheless, a noted limitation of Hafer and Martin’s

study was their lack of recommendations for future research related to strategies and

behavior modifications to address job involvement or employee affective commitment in

the workplace.

The research related to job involvement was vague and the body of literature

related to organizational outcomes could benefit from more empirical studies examining

the relationship between organizational commitment and job involvement (Clay-Warner

et al., 2005; Hallberg & Schaufeli, 2006). By further investigating specifically the role of

job involvement and the details of its relationship to organizational commitment, this

current study made a significant contribution to the existing body of literature related to

workplace place behavioral outcomes.

Job Satisfaction

Unlike previously discussed variables, there was no shortage of research related to

job satisfaction and commitment. In fact, there were a vast number of studies examining

the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment.

Over two decades ago, Spector (1985) argued that it was during the late 1970’s

that the interest in job satisfaction and human service workers began to be used as a

comparison for investigating job satisfaction among industrial workers. Makanjee et al.

(2006) asserted that job satisfaction was essentially the way individuals thought and felt

about their multifaceted work experience. Wegge et al. (2007) agreed that job

satisfaction was a situational variable that was commonly interpreted as the employee’s

feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with his or her job. Because job satisfaction is

one of the most frequently measured organizational variables in research and applied

settings it is often referred to as an employee’s global attitudinal or affective response to

their job. Job satisfaction could include specific interactions related to affective behaviors

including: coworkers, pay, work environment, supervision, type of the work, and fringe

benefits of employment (Spector, 1997; Wegge et al., 2007).

Parnell and Crandall (2003) identified five elements of job satisfaction that have

been empirically validated: pay, security, support, socialization, and growth. The research

indicated that as workplace issues, organizational commitment and job satisfaction

reaches across workplace settings including: healthcare, industrial organizations, white-

collar business, and the service industries. However, few studies examined predictors of

organizational commitment among educators. Parnell and Crandall suggested that future

research focused specifically on developing a better understanding of individuals who

make up the workforce, their needs, and their personal needs of identification with the

organization.

In support of the relationship between job satisfaction and commitment, Karsh et

al. (2005) investigated the relationship between job and organizational determinants of

long-term nursing home employee commitment, job satisfaction, and intent to turnover.

They mainly focused their attention towards predictors of various job characteristics

including: supervision, and personal recognition. It was assumed that based on previous

research, employee’s who worked for well organized nursing facilities and who classified

the working environment as pleasant were more likely to maintain employment with the

organization. As predicted, Karsh et al. found that intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction and

commitment predicted intentions of turnover among long term care nursing home

employees. Specifically, they found that individuals who demonstrated high work

involvement also consider their jobs a significant part of who they are. Positive challenge

at work and perceived control at work were two attitudinal characteristics that have been

linked to high levels of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Karsh et al.

asserted that future studies could be beneficial to the existing body of research related to

commitment, job satisfaction, and tenure by closely examining factors that negatively

impact employee satisfaction and commitment.

As cited previously, scholars continue to draw attention to the relationship between

both job involvement and job satisfaction as attitudinal predictors of organizational

commitment. Particularly, Wegge et al. (2007) found that job involvement affected

absenteeism more if an employee’s job satisfaction was low and especially when

perceptions of the workplace were not positive. Furthermore, the study of organizations

could also benefit from a closer analysis of the interaction between job involvement and

job satisfaction. However, researchers cautioned that a significant limitation to the

research outcome was that the researchers were not able to differentiate between

voluntary versus involuntary absentee behaviors. Karsh et al. (2005) research findings

concluded that if an organization could increase employee satisfaction and commitment,

they would subsequently reduce employee turnover. Specifically, they illustrated that

organizational practices including: work time lines, flexible work schedules, clean and

safe work environments, and receiving some level of feedback form facility

administrators, did impact employees decision to leave or remain with the nursing home

facility.

Clay-Warner et al. (2005) investigated the relationship between organizational

justice and job satisfaction. They asserted that organizational justice has two sub types,

procedural and distributive justice. Moreover, they set out to determine which type of

justice, indeed, had a significant relationship to employee job satisfaction. Clay-Warner

et al. described job satisfaction as a facet related to an employee’s personal, professional

and organizational connection. Furthermore, an employee’s perception of procedural and

distributive justice could impact other attitudinal behaviors in the workplace such as

turnover, work related stress, and employee commitment.

Clay-Warner et al. (2005) conducted a study using a representative sample of

workers across several different workplace settings. Their study revealed that job

characteristics including procedural and distributive justice had a significant effect on job

satisfaction. More specifically, characteristics such as job autonomy, job complexity, co-

worker support, and job stress also had an effect. Clay-Warner et al. suggested that

managers must practice procedural and justice distributive justice if they are seeking a

satisfied workforce. In addition, they also suggested that organizations could benefit from

the pursuance of more longitudinal studies to confirm the outcomes of their present study.

In a recent study, Freund (2005) explored commitment and job satisfaction as

predictors of turnover intentions among welfare workers in the community service sector.

He asserted that welfare organizations employees were often faced with conflicting

commitments towards the organization because of environmental pressures, workload

demands, and personal benefit. Nonetheless, job satisfaction is a mirror of typical

changeable employee outcomes and job satisfaction is an attitudinal variable of interest

because it often impacts organizational workplace outcomes. Freund’s research findings

suggested that welfare workers had high a degree of organizational commitment and they

were highly satisfied. In addition, they concluded that based on the research satisfied

workers would be more likely to mature with the organization. Specifically, welfare

service workers who were satisfied with their jobs provided client centered services in a

professional manner, compared to welfare service workers who were dissatisfied with

their place of employment. Freund suggested management teams could be supportive

towards staff by assisting staff to align their personal and professional goals, promote

mutual values awareness, provide assistance in career development, and reward staff

members who took personal responsibility and asserted some degree of control over their

personal and professional life. Freund argued that employees should have opportunities

for employment that are both challenging and insightful. Moreover, organizational goals

should complement community goals; hence also promoting personal feelings of

belonging and even job satisfaction. Freund suggested that future research studies should

further investigate commitment and job satisfaction as predictors of turnover intentions in

other community based organizations. In addition, specific attention focused on various

types of commitment and their influence on employee-organization workplace outcomes.

Abbott et al. (2006) suggested that many organizations have begun to explore the

use of teams. As a team a group of individuals work together to produce products or

services for which the entire group is responsible for the outcomes. The team approach

has benefits for the organization and the employee alike. Employees who participated in

teams reported greater satisfaction, commitment, and job enrichment interest. Abbott et al

investigated specific job characteristics and outcomes within a team-based consultative

and substantive workplace environment. Consultative team members were employees

who created projects, but did have authority to implement solutions without

management’s consent. Substantive team members had the authority to create projects

and implement solutions within limits of management’s pre-approved discretion. In their

preliminary literature review of attitudinal job characteristics such as job satisfaction and

job involvement, researchers suggested that employees who worked in teams were more

likely to report higher levels of job satisfaction. However, the researchers mentioned that

a global definition of job satisfaction may not include the attitudes of team members

working together because each task would vary in its complexity, purpose, and individual

goal outcome. Abbott et al. suggested that work teams in organizations could satisfy an

employee’s social needs hence, impacting the employee’s satisfaction and commitment to

the group. This further highlighted the need to differentiate between participative

behaviors towards organizational or individual goal outcomes.

Organizational Commitment

There was a plethora of empirical research that examined organizational

commitment as a workplace behavioral outcome. It has been an interest of scholars for

decades and continues to impact organizational behaviors even now in the twenty first

century. As time moves forward and technological advancement of the workforce

increases, an increased understanding of workplace behaviors and specific factors that

contribute to positive behavioral outcomes that influence organizational success, is also

on the rise. Based upon recent studies in the field, there were no single human factors and

constructs that impacted organizational outcomes more than organizational commitment

(Chen et al., 2007; Freund, 2005; Gaziel, 2004; Joiner & Bakalis, 2006; Makanjee et al.,

2006; Obeng & Ugboro, 2003).

Organizational commitment involves an employee’s psychological state that is

influenced by the quality of their relationship with the organization. In addition, Meyer

and Allen (1997) suggested that organizational commitment is best understood and

described as three distinct components: affective, continuance and normative

commitment. Meyer and Allen further argued that affective, continuance, and normative

commitment are components rather than types of commitment. By understanding the

significance of all three components employers had the opportunity to gain focused

understanding of factors that influenced an employee’s relationship with an organization.

Therefore, it is assumed that commitment bonded an employee to a particular

organization. It was clearly advantageous for organizations to recognize that there were

identifiable differences in components of employee commitment and finding out how

those differences impacted work related behaviors such as, job performance, work

involvement, and absenteeism. Much of the research related to organizational

commitment focused on employees in small, private, and primarily blue-collar industries.

Because of limited studies examining the public sector and organizational commitment

across all levels of education, this study expected to make a significant contribution to the

current body of literature.

In addition to organizational success, Obeng and Ugboro (2003) asserted that the

study of organizational commitment led to a broader understanding of management

attitudes that helped to sustain, develop, and increase organizational commitment. As

organizations examined organizational commitment more closely, specific interlocking

workplace relationships such as co-workers and supervisor interactions; provided better

insight regarding employee organizational commitment. Obeng and Ugboro suggested

that committed employees typically worked beyond their outlined job requirements in

support of the organizational needs and they were more likely to display positive

organizational citizenship behaviors. In their study, they examined organizational

commitment among public transit employees and found that the three types of

commitments identified and used may not have been necessary to examine the construct

of organizational commitment among public transit workers. Obeng and Ugboro findings

produced several outcomes: a) a negative relationship between education and

organizational commitment suggested that employees who were well educated and were

presented with more employment opportunities would be less likely to stay with the

organization b) affective commitment also showed a negative relationship towards tenure

in a position and overtime hours c) there were positive correlations between being a

minority and number of years with an organization d) transit employees who were on the

job for a long period of time indicated less normative and affective commitment to the

organization and e) in support of previous studies, Obeng and Ugboro’s research findings

asserted a significant relationship between tenure, gender, and organizational

commitment.

As previously mentioned Makanjee et al. (2006) conducted a study among South

African radiographers and examined whether or not a relationship existed between

perceived organizational support and organizational commitment. In relation to

organizational commitment, researchers found that radiographers who stayed with the

organization did so out of free will, rather than need or obligation. In addition, the study

revealed a relationship between employee affective and normative commitment.

Therefore, radiographers were unlikely to engage in behaviors beyond the discretionary

effort that would benefit the organization. Furthermore, Makanjee et al. research findings

confirmed that committed employees were more likely to provide better service to clients

and engaged in discretionary behaviors beyond the “normal” call of duty.

Gaziel (2004) investigated predictors of absenteeism among primary school

teachers in the West Jerusalem District. Research findings suggested that teachers who

expressed high levels of commitment were less absent from school voluntarily.

Moreover, organizational commitment, school climate, and individual schools who

showed less absenteeism, were better predictors of teacher absenteeism than gender, age,

and education. This finding was in contrast to previous studies that indicated women

were more absent than men and younger teachers were absent than older teachers from

work (Taylor, 1981; Scott & Winbush, 1991 as cited in Gaziel, 2004). Gaziel concluded

that an employee’s absence from work may not be a personal reflection of his or her

feelings of satisfaction with the job, but more so, a reflection of the organizational norms

of that individual establishment. Freund (2005) asserted that employees often have mixed

feelings regarding their unconditional commitment to organizations. It is further

suggested that because employees promoted the organization’s values and goals in their

daily interactions, employers should invest in elements central developing organizational

commitment among their employees. Specifically, Freund suggested that employers

focus their attention on commitment characteristics that highlighted the organizations

values and perceptions, and encouraged an employee’s freedom to promote issues of

concern without fear of consequences. The primary purpose of Freund’s study was to

investigate patterns of organizational commitment, career attitudes, and job satisfaction

on welfare workers that had withdrawal intentions. Freund’s research findings suggested

that organizations make an investment in various types of employee commitment that are

meaningful and effective for predictors of positive employee-organization relationships.

Moreover, the more valued an employee feels, he or she was likely to hold positive

perceptions of fair treatment, rewards, and would remain with the organization. By

making employees feel valued and showing concern for their overall well-being,

employers were likely to see employ workers who make significant contributions to the

organization’s success.

Freund (2005) contended that employees who have high degrees of organizational

commitment and are highly satisfied can be expected to also demonstrate exceptional job

performances. He strongly suggested future research investigate empirical studies similar

in nature to outcomes in community-based organizations to address the effects of

multiple commitments of workplace behavioral outcomes.

Joiner and Bakalis (2006) research related to antecedents of organizational

commitment among Australian tutors findings provided significant support to specific

antecedents that had an impact an employee’s organizational support. Specifically, their

research findings indicated higher education levels and marital status were associated

with lower continuance commitment. Job factors such as organizational support, co-

worker support, access to resources and role clarity were all related to higher affective

commitment. Joiner and Bakalis’ study indicated that pursuit of post-graduate studies at

an individual’s place of employment was associated with higher continuance and

affective commitment. In addition, the researchers found that increased information about

role clarity was associated with higher levels of affective commitment. Specifically,

Joiner and Bakalis mentioned that workplace documentation such as job descriptions

were often vague in the post-secondary setting which may have impacted an employee’s

likelihood of participating in extra-role activities. As organizations desire increased levels

of commitment from their employees, it was important that they too contributed to

maintaining clear expectation and objectives that assisted staff with personal and

professional development. The researchers suggested that future research could

contribute to this body of research by investigating the role of post-secondary tutors

commitment to their immediate supervisors. The study of this relationship would be

especially beneficial in the academic setting career placement and advancement;

Furthermore, additional studies would provide insight into commitment across

international boundaries where educators may hold different cultural views (Joiner &

Bakalis, 2006).

Chen et al. (2007) conducted a study to examine the moderation effect of human

resources (HR) strength on the relationship between employee commitment and job

performance among members of the cosmetology industry. They argued that quality

communication between employee and the organization directly impacted employee

commitment and job performance. Chen et al. examined specifically workplace behaviors

among cosmetology stylist, managers, and owners. Three types of commitment were

evaluated: affective, normative, and continuance. The research findings revealed that

perceptions of HR practices did have a positive effect on employee commitment.

Moreover, the more consistent the perceptions between managers and stylists the greater

the employee commitment especially related to clear and direct communication regarding

workplace norms and expectations. Chen et al. contended that good administrative

practices directly improved employee commitment and performance. Moreover, they

suggested future longitudinal studies show stronger evidence of causality of increased

commitment and employee performance. Although insightful, the evidence of this study

was limited to the cosmetology industry and the replication of this study in other

industries would ensure study outcomes could be generalized (Chen et al., 2007).

Collier and Esteban (2007) argued that corporate social responsibility was

possible predictor of employee commitment. Although the relationship is

multifaceted and often complex, organizational commitment was expected to influence

organizational outcomes such as perceptions of justice and fairness. Furthermore,

motivation was a key stimulus facet of employee behaviors. Specifically, Collier and

Esteban stated, “Motivation comes first; and commitment reinforces and embeds

corporate responsible behaviors” (p. 23). It was further argued that because commitment

encouraged discretionary behaviors it was expected that those behaviors would reinforce

employee commitment to the organization. More importantly, Collier and Esteban

strongly suggested that organizations recognized that employee commitment cannot be

forced, but only encouraged.

As a social system, organizations are expected to engage in behaviors that are

both beneficial to the individual and the organization. Moreover, those behaviors should

also promote personal and professional advancement that is meaningful for both

contributing parties. It should be seen as a reflection of organizational excellence and

cohesion.

Several scholars suggested that employees were more likely to identify with

organizations that were ethical, just, and concerned about the general welfare of its

workers (Chen et al., 2007; Joiner & Bakalis, 2006; Makanjee et al., 2006). Meeting

employee expectations was not only a significant element that influenced employee trust

and the promotion of citizenship behaviors, but also ultimately a deciding factor that

encouraged employee commitment. Based on the deficits mentioned by the previous

studies, it was expected that this study would contribute to the body of literature by

further investigating factors such as job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support as predictors of organizational commitment.

Gender

There were limited studies investigating the relationship between gender and

organizational commitment. Caselman and Brandt (2007) argued that gender influenced

the self-perceptions of both men and women not only in organizational settings, but in

their personal and social settings as well. Nonetheless, current studies that were available

showed inconsistent results regarding the relationship between gender and organizational

commitment. As previously stated, Witt and Nye (1992) examined perceived fairness of

pay and promotion and job satisfaction in relation to gender. Contrary to previous studies,

their research found no difference in perception of job fairness and job satisfaction

between male and female employees. Moreover, their findings suggested that there was

no need for management to enforce different behavioral strategies for men and women

when attempting to influence employee job satisfaction and perceptions of fairness

among both men and women. Witt and Nye’s research indicated that men are more likely

to remain with an organization than women.

Kidd and Smewing (2001) investigated the role of supervisors in the career

management of employees. Specifically, they examined the role of gender on

organizational outcomes. Prior to their study, the researchers were under the assumption

that at higher levels within organizations, women benefited more than men from career

and psychosocial benefits received through organizational support; thus, were more likely

to report higher levels of organizational commitment. Based on Kidd and Smewing’s

research findings, there were no significant gender differences in perceived

organizational support for supervisors. However, increased perceived support was

associated with increases in organizational commitment for women. Specifically, Kidd

and Smewing contended that compared to men, women’s relationship with their

supervisor directly impacted their work attitudes towards the organization. They strongly

urged future researchers to identify the conditions under which organizational support

may impact employee commitment.

In a more recent study, Karrasch (2003) conducted an investigation to examine

antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment among men and women in

the military. The Allen and Meyer (1991) Three commitment, TCM Employee

Commitment Survey measuring affective, normative, and continuance employee

commitment was used for the study. Specific antecedents investigated included: gender,

ethnicity, branch of the Army, and perceptions of tokenism. Because of the hectic

schedules, strenuous workloads, and life-threatening duties, research findings from

military personnel provided a wealth of information related to organizational

commitment. Moreover, Karrasch was specifically interested in investigating antecedents

that did contribute to understanding the development and factors that impact commitment

growth within the individual.

Karrasch (2003) suggested that males reported significantly higher continuance

commitment than female military personnel. There were no significant differences in

gender related to affective and normative commitment. Nonetheless, the researcher

argued that perhaps the differences in male and female commitment was attributed to

male soldiers having more years invested with the Army than women. Furthermore, other

demographic antecedents presented in the study showed significant implications for the

Army to maintain a committed workforce. Karrasch suggested that future research utilize

a general scale to measure organizational commitment as compared to a multi-component

scale, which did not provide a significant difference as a measure of organizational

commitment among military personnel.

Because of the lack of formal research specifically addressing organizational

commitment and gender, various other studies have examined gender and its relationship

to organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB). OCB is often described as discretionary

“unspoken” behaviors that promoted the production, welfare, and functioning of an

organization. Farrell and Finkelstein (2007) conducted a study that examined the

difference between helping versus civic virtue behaviors among men and women. Their

study indicated that prior research related to OCB and gender showed that helping

behaviors was more expected of women and civic virtue behaviors more indicative of

men. The research findings showed that only under certain conditions were observers

more likely to expect male employees than female employees to participate in civic virtue

behaviors. Furthermore, females were more likely to participate in helping and some

evidence even showed that they were also more likely to participate in non-verbal civic

virtue duties than males. Based on the results of the study, observers made different

assumptions for male and female employee’s participation in helping. Farrell and

Finkelstein suggested the following explanations for the biased assumptions: gender

stereotyping, role expectations, the fact that men are not viewed as “natural” helpers, and

they were more likely to participate in helping behaviors for alternative motives. In

addition, they also suggested that researchers should further investigate whether

supervisors make similar biased assumptions regarding gender and organizational

citizenship specific behaviors.

Van der Velde, Bossink, and Jansen (2003) investigated gender differences and

the influence of professional tenure on work attitudes. In their observation much of the

research prior to their study primarily focused on professional tenure among men; hence,

they focused their research on a large population of both men and women. Van der Velde

et al. (2003) study sample was drawn from a large Dutch oil company. The sample

consisted of both professional men and women. Their findings revealed a positive

correlation between tenure, age, and organizational commitment. Furthermore, evidence

showed an increase in job involvement with employee age. The study further indicated

professional tenure had a negative effect on job involvement and organizational

commitment. However, professional tenure among female employees showed a stronger

effect on organizational commitment than for their male counterparts. This study clearly

demonstrated a linear relationship between gender, tenure and workplace attitudes. More

importantly, it also showed a difference in attitudes based on gender. Similar to earlier

studies, Van der Velde et al. research findings confirmed that men were reportedly more

likely to remain with the organization than women.

Because of the current demands and changes in the types of the workplace

environments, the virtual workplace, working from home, and flextime employment, has

become increasingly more popular in the world of work. Current researchers argued that

it is no longer “fashionable” for employees to remain with a company for an extended

period of time for a variety of reasons (Farrell & Finkelstein, 2007; Meyer & Allen,

1997; Van der Velde et al., 2003). Specifically, a change in view of the traditional

workforce has been cited as a plausible explanation for the negative affects on workplace

behaviors. In addition, changes in social times has also been a source identified that

influenced job involvement, organizational commitment, and traditional versus non-

traditional gender roles amongst both genders. Van der Velde et al. (2003) contended that

staying in a specific profession for a long period of time may negatively impact work

attitudes. Therefore, in order to maintain high levels of job involvement, job satisfaction,

and workplace commitment; employees, avoided remaining with a company over an

extended period of time.

Tenure

Tenure is a workplace variable that has recently gained much attention because of

its indicated relationship to an employee’s decision to remain with an organization. There

were limited studies examining the relationship between commitment and tenure.

Chang and Choi (2007) argued that employees may chose to remain with an

organization for the long haul because of their organizational and professional

commitments alike. Chang and Choi examined the relationship between organizational

and professional commitment among research and development doctorate prepared

professionals at large Korean electronic companies to gain better insight into the impact

of tenure on workplace behaviors including organizational commitment. Many of the

professionals, because of their intensive educational and technical background reported

difficulty conforming to the goals and norms of the organization; especially, in the

beginning of their tenure.

Chang and Choi (2007) argued that many professionals experienced a honeymoon

phase of the workplace within one to six months of their initial employment. After the

honeymoon phase, employees typically entered the “realty shock” phase. During this

phase they usually reported that their expectations were unmet and stated specific

instances of dissatisfaction with the organization. Typically within one to two years of

joining the organization, the employee began to settle into his or her position and

adjusted to the organizational norms. It was during this time that they gained a sense of

belonging and experienced social exchanges within the organizational network. The

research findings contended that employees who initially had low commitment and who

chose to remain with the organization; over time, was expected to report an increase in

organizational commitment. Consistent with past studies, Chang and Choi suggested that

research and development professionals demonstrated U-shaped changes in commitment

over time; therefore, managers of highly trained and educated employees may benefit

from mentorship and paying special attention to the honeymoon phase employees’ early

socialization interactions.

A major limitation of this study was that its data was collected from companies in

Korea; therefore, the outcome generalizability was grossly limited. Chang and Choi

suggested future researchers explore the dynamics investigated in this study among other

professions such as medicine, law, and accounting.

As previously mentioned, Joiner and Bakalis (2006) conducted research related

to antecedents of organizational commitment among post-secondary tutors. Their

research findings suggested that lower tenure is associated with lower continuance and

affective commitment. However, various workplace antecedents like strong co-worker

and organizational support was associated with higher affective commitment. The

researchers noted that a crucial limitation to their research findings may be that the results

could not be generalized to any university setting as the sample primarily represented

causal academic tutors in Australia.

Feather and Rauter (2004) conducted a study to investigate organizational

citizenship behaviors (OCB) in relation to: job status, job security, organizational

commitment and identification, job satisfaction, and work values. Their research findings

indicated that contracted, non- tenured, teachers reported more organizational citizenship

behaviors when compared to tenure, permanently employed, teachers. As Feathers and

Rauter mentioned, it was expected for non-tenured teachers to perform task beyond their

normal duties. However, they were expected to volunteer for additional duties that would

help their schools and increase their potential for tenured employment. Furthermore,

tenured teachers had more job security and were more likely to have more responsibilities

related to their experience and number of years on the job. Research findings did find a

relationship between OCB and levels of affective commitment and identification for

permanently employed teachers. Feather and Rauter suggested future studies examine,

specifically, measures of expectations related to change in job status and measures of

each person’s goal structure for both tenure and non-tenured employees.

Caselman and Brandt (2007) investigated factors that may have influenced school

social workers intent to stay with an organization. Their research findings suggested that

the relationship between the intent to stay and the number of years of experience was not

significant. However, there was a relationship between intent to stay, collaboration with

school personnel, and self-efficacy. Specifically, when school administrators, counselors

and teachers engaged in a collaborative effort, it greatly influenced school social workers

and their intent to stay with an organization. Moreover, workers who were confident in

their abilities to approach different task appropriately, demonstrated an efficacious

attitude that created intrinsic interest, and significant commitment to their jobs. Caselman

and Brandt urged school systems to create meaningful dialogue among school personnel;

hence, providing opportunities for increased employee moral, and improved student

academic outcomes. Such dialogue and social exchanges would not only increase the

quality of service to students, but also impact the level of employee satisfaction and their

intent to stay with a given organization.

Based on the information gathered in this literature review the topic of

organizational commitment is one of interest to corporations around the world in most

major industries from China, to India, Japan, and the United States alike. While each

country may have cultural factors impacting organizational commitment, it was evident

in numerous studies that commitment did impact organizational productivity and success

(Chang & Choi, 2007; Chen et al., 2007; Collier & Esteban, 2007; Coyle-Shapiro, &

Conway, 2005; Farrell & Finkelstein, 2007; Freund, 2005).

Chapter Summary

The growing body of literature continues to highlight specific factors that impact

workplace outcomes. Over the past four decades organizational commitment has been a

workplace variable of interest among researchers. However, more recently organizational

commitment has also been identified as a primary contributor of organizational outcomes.

Specifically, the intent of this study was to further investigate whether or not job

satisfaction, job involvement, gender, and perceived organizational support were valid

predicators of organizational commitment among educators.

One of the first steps behaviorist and industrial researchers needed to take was to

investigate which attitudinal and situational variables had the greatest impact on

workplace outcomes. It was evident that being systematic and providing structure is

essential to organizational success. Nonetheless, greater attention focused on those

persons who implement changes and hold all the organizational pieces in place

effectively was warranted (Eisenberger et al., 2002; Fuller et al., 2003; Idsoe, 2006).

In the 21

century workforce, with virtual work stations, home based businesses,

and the growth of work teams, significant attention continues to be “people power”

focused. No matter how much technology advances, the workforce continues to require

effective communication, fairness, satisfaction, collaboration, and the need for people

still exist. This study drew further attention to the humanistic dimension of the world of

work, which is essential to a cohesive, productive, and successful organization.

Identifying factors that predicted organizational commitment in organizational settings

was invaluable. It was especially helpful in education as researchers struggled to identify

factors that directly or indirectly impact student failure, drop out rates, and other

influences of poor student academic achievement.

Chapter 3 reports a detailed description of research study’s methodology, sample,

settings, and instruments, hypotheses, and data collection methods.

Chapter 4 reports the results of the study that addresses the major research

question and the examination of the study’s hypotheses.

Chapter 5 discusses the results and its comparison and contrast to previous studies

related to organizational commitment.

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHOD

Introduction

This study examined the relationship between job satisfaction, job involvement,

perceived organizational support, and employee organizational commitment. This

research used a nonexperimental design. Pedhazur and Schmelkin (1991) drew attention

to the lack of agreement by experts regarding classification of research designs. They

preferred to classify research broadly into experimental, quasi-experimental, and

nonexperimental, with the only differences amongst them being the lack of

randomization to groups for quasi-experimental and the lack of both randomization and

manipulation of the independent variable for nonexperimental. The present study was

considered no-experimental research. The researchers further argued it was important to

note that threats to validity in explanatory research did not arise in predictive research. In

actuality, few research studies were conducted as true experiments (Cook & Campbell,

1979). The design of this study had a possible threat to external population validity, but

every effort was made to describe the sample as thoroughly as possible so that any

significant results may be cautiously generalized to similar populations.

This chapter details the research methodology that was utilized in the.

study. Specifically, the chapter provides a summation of the research approach, the

sample population, data collection methods, instrumentation, and statistical analysis. The

reliability and validity of the instrumentation are also discussed.

Research Design

This study investigated the relationship between job satisfaction, job involvement,

perceived organizational support, and employee organizational commitment through a

quantitative design. Three methods of analysis were used to address the research

question. Three hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted to address hypothesis 1.

Hypothesis 2 was addressed with a t-test analysis. Hypotheses 3, 4, and 5 of the study,

were addressed by correlational analysis. The independent (predictor) variables were:

gender, job satisfaction, as measured by the Job Satisfaction Survey, perceived

organizational support, as measured by the Survey of Perceived Organizational Support,

and job involvement, as measured by the Job Involvement Questionnaire. The outcome

variable was organizational commitment, and was measured by the TCM Employee

Commitment Survey’s three subscales: Affective, Continuance, and Normative

Commitment. The demographic variables were entered first in a separate block, so that

any variances attributable to these factors were accounted for prior to entering job

satisfaction, organizational support, and job involvement. These last three factors were

also entered in separate blocks, so that each of the three regressions tested a four-block

model. The first block contained the demographic variables. Block two included job

satisfaction, block three perceived organizational support, and block four included job

involvement.

This study was a nonexperimental quantitative study, based on survey

methodology. It was inappropriate to use analysis of variance as a statistical method.

Three hierarchical multiple regressions used provided statistically powerful tools to

answer the research questions. Regression analysis explained the variance in the outcome

measures due to the individual and combined contribution of the unique set of predictors

that were used in this study.

Target Population and Sample

Participants for this study were solicited from educators on the primary, middle,

high school, and post-secondary levels of education. Participants were solicited from

faculty at the following educational institutions and school systems in North Alabama:

Athens State University, Alabama A&M University, University of Alabama in

Huntsville, and the Huntsville City School System. The educational institutions and

systems were selected because of the researcher’s affiliations, close proximity, and local

accessibility. The target population included males and females between the ages of 21 to

65. The educational level of the participants ranged from a bachelor to the post-doctoral

degree level. Participants’ ethnicity included: African American, European American,

Hispanic, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, and other ethnic backgrounds. The

researcher e-mailed 900 questionnaires to the study’s participants. The e-mail invited

them to participate in the study and included a brief description with an online link to the

research survey.

The data collected for this study were confidential. The research data for the study

were collected on a secure website and only the researcher had access to the study’s

questionnaire responses. A copy of the invitation that was sent to the participants can be

found in Appendix A.

Hypotheses

The purpose of this research was to examine the relationship between gender, a

selected demographic, job satisfaction, job involvement, perceived organizational

support, and affective, continuance, and normative commitment.

Three hypotheses were tested in this study:

Hypothesis 1

01.

There is no linear relationship between affective commitment and the

following set of variables: gender, job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support.

Higher affective commitment scores as measured by the TCM Employee

Commitment Survey Affective Commitment Subscale will be related to gender, higher

job satisfaction, higher job involvement, and higher perceived organizational support.

Hypothesis 2

. There is no linear relationship between continuance commitment and the

following set of variables: gender, job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support as measured by the TCM Employee Commitment Survey

Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment Subscales.

A2.

There is a relationship between higher continuance commitment as

measured by the TCM Employee Commitment Survey’s Continuance Commitment

Subscale and gender, higher job satisfaction, higher job involvement, and higher

perceived organizational support.

Hypothesis 3

H03. There is no linear relationship between normative commitment and

following set of variables: gender, job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support as measured by the Affective, Continuance, and Normative

Commitment Scale.

HA3. Male educators with higher normative commitment scores as measured by

the Normative Commitment Scale, will also have higher of job satisfaction, higher job

involvement, and higher perceived organizational support.

Instrumentation

All participants completed a demographic survey. They also complete the

Satisfaction Survey, the Job Involvement Questionnaire, and the Survey of Perceived

Organizational Support, which measured the independent variables of the study

(Eisenberger et al., 1986; Kanungo, 1982; Spector, 1997). The TCM Employee

Commitment Survey’s Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment Subscales,

addressed the outcome variable of the study.

Demographic Survey

The survey consisted of 8 items and took about 1 to 3 minutes to complete. The

first item asked the participant their age. The next item asked the participant his or her

gender. The remaining items of the survey items were related to their career including:

tenure, highest level of educational attainment, nature of their occupational organization,

years of teaching experience, number of years with current organization, and the current

position status of employment. This instrument was used to gather background

information about the participants for comparison of the groups and was only used for

descriptive purposes. A copy of the demographic survey may be found in Appendix B.

Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS)

The Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) is designed to measure an employee’s level of

satisfaction about his or her job and aspects of their job (Spector, 1997). The

questionnaire was primarily used to assess the job satisfaction of adults in the public and

non-profit human service industries including law enforcement and medicine.

The JSS is a 36-item, 9-facet, Likert-type scale. Scores on each of the 9-facet

subscales are based on 4-items each and can range from 4 to 24. Scores for the

employee’s total job satisfaction is based on the total of all 36-items and can range from

36 to 216. The JSS has items written in the positive and negative direction. Specifically,

high scores on the scale represent job satisfaction; therefore, the negatively worded items

were reversed before adding the positively worded scores into the facets on total scores.

The nine facets assessed included: pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits,

contingent rewards, operating conditions, coworkers, nature of work, and

communication. Each facet was measured by four items. A summated scale format was

used in the questionnaire. The participant had six responses to choose from per item

ranging from: (1) disagree very much to (6) agree very much. It took approximately 8

minutes to administer.

The instrument developed in 1985, has test-retest reliabilities ranging from .37 to

.74 for the subscales and .71 for the entire scale (Spector, 1985). The alpha coefficients

for the total scale ranges from .70 to .91(Spector, 1985). Over the past 23 years, this

instrument has been administered to approximately 30,582 employees in approximately

116 studies (Spector, 2007). A copy of the JSS may be found in Appendix C.

Job Involvement Questionnaire (JIQ)

The JIQ is an instrument designed to measure an individual’s psychological

identification with a specific job and with work in general (Kanungo, 1982). The survey

has been administered to adults in corporate, healthcare, and social service industries.

The JIQ is a six-point, 10-item, Likert response scales with anchors ranging from

(1) strongly agree to (6) strongly disagree. Kanungo (1982) reports a one dimensional

variable with a Cronbach Alpha coefficient ranging from 0.81 to .86 (Blau, 1987; Hafer

& Martin, 2006, Kanungo, 1982; Wegge, et al., 2007). The questionnaire’s internal

consistency is reported as.88 (Kanungo, 1982). The JIQ specifically measures an

employee’s attitude towards his or her job.

Over the past 26 years the instrument has test retest reliabilities of .87 and .85

respectively (Elloy, 1995; Kanungo, 1982). The JIQ was appropriate for this study

because it is a reliable measurement (Hafer & Martin, 2006; Hallberg & Schaufeli, 2006;

Somech & Ron, 2007; Wegge, et al., 2007) of an employee’s level of job involvement. A

copy of the JIQ may be found in Appendix D.

Survey of Perceived Organizational Support (SPOS)

The SPOS is designed to measure possible feelings an individual may have about

the organization for which they work (Eisenberger et al., 1986, p. 502). This survey has

been administered to adults who work in white collar and blue-collar industries including

the education, healthcare, postal, law, and the banking and financial industries.

The SPOS is a self-administered survey, seven-point, 36-item, Likert-type scale

indicated the extent to which an employee agreed or disagreed with the statement: (1)

strongly disagree to (7) strongly disagree. The survey measured the following factors: in-

role performance, extra role performance, employee perception of organizational support,

and concern of the employee’s overall well-being. It took approximately 5 minutes to

complete the survey. Summing the point values derived the total scores.

The SPOS was designed to measure an employee’s perception of organizational

support. There is a short and long version of this instrument. The short version, consisting

of 8-items, was used for this study. Previous studies reported that the instrument has high

internal reliability. The short version, 8 of the 36-items loaded highly on the main

perceived organizational support factor (Eisenberger et al., 1986). Shanock and

Eisenberger (2006) reported high internal reliabilities with coefficient alphas ranging

from .87 to .93. An item analysis was performed on the survey indicating item-total

correlations ranging from .42 to .83 (Shanock & Eisenberger, 2006). Eisenberger et al.

(1986) reported mean and median item-total correlations were .67 and .66 respectively.

`Furthermore, a statistically significantly positive relationship was found between

perceived organizational support and other work related outcomes (Shanock &

Eisenberger, 2006). A cross-level mediational analysis was conducted to ensure

perceived organizational support significantly predicted work outcome factors.

Furthermore, Lynch, Eisenberger and Armeli (1999) reported a confirmatory factor

analysis of the short version of SPOS similar to a unitary factor structure and the items

indicated a Cronbach alpha of .90 (Lynch et al., 1999; Eisenberger et al., 1997). A copy

of the short version of the SPOS may be found in Appendix E.

TCM Employee Commitment Survey

The TCM Employee Commitment Survey measures employee organizational

commitment based on three major components: affective, continuance, and normative

commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1997). The survey has been used with adults in the

healthcare, business, and industrial related occupations. The TCM Employee

Commitment Survey is self-administered; 7-point scale with anchors identified from (1)

strongly agree to (7) strongly disagree. The survey items labeled R indicated the reverse-

keyed items.

There are two versions of the survey, the original and the revised version. The

original version is comprised of 8-items for each subscale (Meyer & Allen, 1997). The

revised version includes 6-items per subscale. The revised version consisting of 18-items

total was used for this study. It took approximately 5-7 minutes to administer the survey.

Computing the point value of each item across each item on all subscales derived the

total score. The possible scores ranged from 24 to 192. Participants with higher levels of

commitment are indicated by a higher numerical score.

The instrument was developed over 18 years ago. Blau, Paul, and St. John (1993)

found a test-retest reliability coefficient of .94 for Affective commitment when the survey

was administered seven weeks apart to a group of employees whose average tenure with

the company was more than 5 years. The number of estimates obtained for the three

subscales range from a low of 20 for the normative scale to a high of more than 40 for the

Affective commitment subscale. The median reliabilities for the Affective, Continuance,

and Normative subscales respectively are .85, .79, and .73 (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Factor

analysis has been conducted on the three component model to confirm that the three

commitment constructs are distinguishable from other related employment measures such

as perceived organizational support and job satisfaction (Meyer & Allen, 1997). A copy

of the scale is shown in Appendix F.

Data Collection Methods

This study was a nonexperimental research and reported correlational data.

All surveys for the study were completed electronically on Survey Monkey a secure

website dedicated to online surveys. Preceding the link to the survey, an introductory e-

mail letter explaining the purpose of the study and addressing informal consent was

provided. A copy of the introductory letter may be found in Appendix G. No potential

harm, physical or mental, was expected as a result of participating in this study. In

addition, participants who successfully completed the survey had an opportunity to enter

into a drawing for a $100.00 credit card.

The researcher provided electronic survey access to all participating educational

institutions. The authorization official for each educational system then appointed an IT

Network Specialist or administrator to forward the surveys to appropriate potential

participants. The network specialist received, via e-mail, an attachment to the invitation

e-mail with a link to the survey. That e-mail was then forwarded to a sample population

of educators within their organization.

Nine hundred educators were solicited via e-mail to participate in the study. Two

hundred surveys were sent to faculty members of Athens State University. Two hundred

surveys were sent to faculty members of Alabama A&M University in Normal, Alabama.

Two hundred surveys were sent to post-secondary educators at the University of Alabama

in Huntsville in Huntsville, Alabama. One hundred surveys were sent to educators

employed with the Huntsville City School System.

The survey was accessible to the potential participants for 30 days. Two weeks

after the initial invitation via e-mail, a reminder e-mail was sent to the potential

participants to complete the survey. Surveys completed within the initial 30 days, were

used for the study. The data was downloaded in Excel format and then converted to SSPS

for storage and data analysis.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics was used to characterize the sample. In addition, summary

tables were provided of all the scores evaluated. Frequency tables and means and

standard deviations were used according to the level of measurement of each variable.

Three hierarchical multiple regression analyses conducted to test the hypotheses.

Number of years as an educator, gender, and school setting were entered in the first block

as predictors, followed by the addition of job satisfaction scores, organizational support

scores, and job involvement scores in separate blocks. Thus a total of four models were

tested. The outcome variables for the regressions were the normative, continuance, and

affective organizational commitment scores.

Prior to running these analyses, tests were conducted to assure that the analyses

did not violate the assumptions of normality, linearity or homoscedasticity. In addition,

tolerances were checked to avoid collinearity. A thorough data analysis provided a

comparison of models so that the independent and successive contributions of the

variables were assessed. In the case of a significant regression value, the beta weights

were examined to determine which individual variables explained the most variance in

the equation. The alpha level was set to .05.

Chapter Summary

This chapter presented the research design and survey methodology.

The target populations for the survey were educators who work in the elementary,

middle, secondary, and post-secondary levels of education. The sample population was

solicited from educators in the North Alabama area, within the United Sates.

Approximately 900 potential participants were solicited. However, due to technical

difficulty at two of the solicited educational institutions only 600 surveys were actually

distributed. The following instruments were used to collect the data: the Job Satisfaction

Survey, the Job Involvement Questionnaire, and the TCM Employee Commitment

Survey which included the Affective, Normative, and Continuance Commitment

Subscales. The survey was disseminated in an electronic format. The educational

Institution’s that participated in the study sent via e-mail to a sample population within

their organization an introductory letter, with a link to the survey. All surveys received

within the first 30 days, were used for the study. The usable surveys were stored in SPSS.

Chapter 4 presents the results of the study that answered the major research

question and examined the hypotheses. Specifically, it provides the results of the study

and whether or not an employee’s level of organizational commitment is influenced by

gender, number of years with an organization, age, job satisfaction, job involvement, and

perceived organizational support.

Chapter 5 discusses the results, and the comparison of those results to previous

studies, and the limitations of the current study. The outcome of the study was expected

to support recommendations that are applicable to various organizational settings and

highlight implications for social change in educational organizations.

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between gender, job

satisfaction, job involvement, perceived organizational support and affective,

continuance, and normative organizational commitment among educators. This study was

conducted because educators are a part of an influential force that plays a key role in the

success and failure of students, employees, and society in general (Parker Ayers, 2009).

Educators are charged with the task of not only preparing students for the world of work,

but more importantly, educational experiences that provide lifelong learning (Parker

Ayers, 2009). This chapter presents the results of the descriptive statistics that summarize

all collected data and the inferential analyses conducted to test the study’s hypotheses.

Descriptive Analysis

Demographic Data

A total of 171 educators participated in the study. Most of the respondents were

female (74.3%) and had tenure (66.6%). Twenty-four percent of the respondents had

earned a bachelors degree, whereas 76% earned a Masters degree or higher. Almost all of

the respondents were primarily employed by a public organization (98.8%). With regard

to job description, the majority of the study’s respondents were teachers (52.2%) and

21.6% of the respondents were post-secondary educators.

Table 1

Frequency Distribution of Participants’ Demographics (N = 171)

Demographic f %

Gender

Male 44 25.7

Female 127 74.3

Total 171 100.0

Tenure

Tenured 114 66.7

Non Tenured 57 33.3

Total 171 100.0

Highest Degree Earned

Bachelor degree 41 24.0

Master degree 67 39.2

Educational Specialists 13 7.6

Doctorate degree 50 29.2

Total 171 100.0

Type of Organization

Public 169 98.8

Private 2 1.2

Total 171 100.0

Job Description

Teacher 89 52.0

Administrator 16 9.4

Support Staff 29 17.0

Post-secondary educator 37 21.6

Total 171 100.0

The summary statistics of the demographics that were measured on a continuous

scale are discussed in this section. The mean age of the respondents was 48.25 years. The

mean years of teaching experience was 15.36. The mean number of years in their current

organization was 11.08. However, this statistic may not be the most accurate measure of

central tendency for the variable because the distribution was positively skewed. The

median value was 9.00 years, and is more representative of the average number of years

in a present organization.

Table 2

Summary Statistics for Participant Demographics (N= 171)

Demographic Min Max M SD

Age 40 75 48.25 10.86

Years of Teaching Experience 0 53 15.36 10.88

Years in Current Organization 1 39 11.08 8.80

___________________________________________________________________

The summary statistics for the JSS Subscales warranted attention as the statistical

analysis provided very useful information. There are nine subscales in the JSS Inventory.

As table 3 shows below, the lowest ranking mean subscale score was promotion, with a

mean of 11.96. Other low ranking scores were pay, with a mean of 12.02, and operating

conditions, with a mean of 12.49. In contrast, respondents assigned the highest ranking

mean subscale score to nature of work, with a mean of 20.91. Respondents also assigned

higher mean subscale scores to supervision, with a mean of 19.08, and coworkers, with a

mean of 18.08.

Table 3

Summary Statistics for Subscales of the Job Satisfaction Survey (N=171)

JSS Subscales Min Max M SD

Pay 4.00 24.00 12.02 4.96

Promotion 4.00 23.00 11.96 4.50

Supervision 4.00 24.00 19.80 5.02

Fringe benefits 5.00 24.00 15.76 4.40

Contingent rewards 4.00 24.00 14.25 5.28

Operating conditions 4.00 23.00 12.49 4.49

Coworker 7.00 24.00 18.08 4.35

Nature of work 10.00 24.00 20.91 3.20

Communication 4.00 24.00 15.63 4.93

Total Job Satisfaction Score 75.00 203.00 140.91 28.42

A summary of all of the inventory scores of the study has been provided and are

discussed accordingly. The JIQ total score resulted in a mean of 36.25. The SPOS total

score resulted in a mean of 30.38. The Affective Commitment Subscale (ACS) total score

resulted in a mean of 24.50, the Continuance Commitment Subscale (CCS) resulted in a

mean of 27.65, and Normative Commitment Subscale (NCS) total score resulted in a

mean of 27.61.

Table 4

Summary Statistics of All Inventory Scores

________________________________________________________________________

Inventory Scores N Min Max M SD

________________________________________________________________________

Job Involvement Questionnaire 171 13.00 60.00 36.25 9.22

Total Score (JIQ)

Survey of Organizational Support 171 8.00 48.00 30.38 8.84

Total Score (SOPS)

Affective Commitment Subscale 171 13.00 34.00 24.50 3.75

Total Score (TCM/ACS)

Continuance Commitment Subscale 171 13.00 41.00 27.65 6.55

Total Score (TCM/CCS)

Normative Commitment Subscale 168 6.00 42.00 27.61 8.88

Total Score (TCM/NCS)

Multivariate Analysis and Hypothesis Testing

Using hierarchal regression, three null hypotheses were tested in this study.

Each hypothesis postulated that there were no significant changes to the criterion variable

in the value of R

, after accounting for previous predictors entered into the regression. In

addition to the hierarchical regression the significance of the individual beta weights were

assessed.

Hypotheses 1: Affective Commitment

A hierarchical multiple regression was performed to test the following null

hypothesis:

01.

There is no linear relationship between affective commitment and the

following set of variables: gender, job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support.

The results of the hierarchical multiple regression for affective commitment are

presented in this section. The fourth model, which included gender, job satisfaction

scores, job involvement scores, and perceived organizational scores, provided the largest

value for adjusted R

(.10). An inspection of the change statistics, however, showed that

no significant amount of variance resulted from the addition of the POS scores

2 change

=.016, p = .09). The only significant change in explained variance occurred

when the job satisfaction and job involvement scores were added with the second and

third models. While it must be noted that an inspection of the ANOVA statistics revealed

that the models 2 – 4 were all statistically significant, the lack of a significant change in

explained variance in the fourth model indicated that this model should be ignored in

favor of the third model, which contained the last significant change. The third model,

consisting of gender, job satisfaction and job involvement, explained approximately 9%

of the variance in the affective commitment total score, based on the adjusted R

value.

This model was the most appropriate model for further examination and discussion.

The coefficients in the Model 3, consisting of gender, job satisfaction, and job

involvement, were evaluated to assess the individual contribution of the predictor

variables. Two factors had significant beta weights. Job satisfaction (β = .28, p = .00) was

the biggest contributor to affective commitment, followed by job involvement (β = .17, p

= .02). It is concluded that the hypothesis concerning affective commitment was partially

supported. Specifically, greater job satisfaction and greater job involvement were related

to higher levels of affective organizational commitment. Gender and POS were not

significantly related to this outcome. The results related to affective commitment are

presented in Table 5.

Table 5

Regression Results for Four Predictors of Affective Commitment

Adjusted R

p p

Model R

Change F Change ANOVA

1 .000 -.006 .000 .99 .99

2 .080 .069 .080 .00** .00**

3 .108 .092 .028 .02* .00**

4 .124 .103 .016 .09 .00**

Unstandardized Standardized

Coefficients Coefficients

Model 3 B SE β t p

(Constant) 16.59 1.84 9.00 .00

Gender .31 .64 .04 .49 .62

JSS .04 .01 .28 3.78 .00**

JIS .07 .03 .17 2.28 .02*

Note. JSS= Job Satisfaction Scores; JIS= Job Involvement Scores

*p < .05, ** p < .01

Hypothesis 2: Continuance Commitment

A hierarchical multiple regression was performed to test the following null

hypothesis:

. There is no linear relationship between continuance commitment and the

following set of variables: gender, job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support.

The results of the hierarchical regression computed for the continuance

commitment subscale scores are discussed in this section. The ANOVA results, which

indicated if any of the four tested models were statistically significant, showed that all

four models were significant. It was necessary to examine the R

change statistics to

reliably assess the success of the models in predicting continuance commitment. These

statistics showed that gender was significant in the first model (R

2 change

=.044, p = .01),

and the only subsequent model to add a significant amount of explained variance was

found in third model (R

2 change

=.057, p = .00). This third model’s predictors consisted of

gender, job satisfaction, and job involvement and explained approximately 10% of the

adjusted variance in the continuance commitment scores. The third model, therefore, was

the focus of the remainder of this analysis.

The coefficients in Table 6 were examined in order to gauge the relative

contribution of the predictors in Model 3, consisting of: gender, job satisfaction, and job

involvement. Two of the three predictors were significant on an individual basis, job

involvement (β = .24, p = .00) and gender (β = .18, p= .02), with job involvement making

100

the larger contribution to the explained variance. Specifically, educators with higher

levels of job involvement tend to have higher levels of continuance commitment. Job

satisfaction and POS were not related to continuance commitment. These results partially

support the three hypotheses and are highlighted in Table 6.

Table 6

Regression Results for Four Predictors of Continuance Commitment

Adjusted R

p p

Model R

Change F Change ANOVA

1 .044 .038 .044 .01* .01*

2 .054 .043 .010 .19 .01*

3 .111 .095 .057 .00** .00**

4 .111 .089 .000 .89 .00**

Unstandardized Standardized

Coefficients Coefficients

Model B SE β t p

3 (Constant) 23.12 3.21 7.19 .00**

Gender 2.66 1.12 .18 2.40 .02*

JSS -.03 .02 1.11 -1.49 .14

JIS .17 .05 .24 3.26 .00**

Note. JSS= Job Satisfaction Scores; JIS= Job Involvement Scores

* p < .05, ** p < .01

101

Hypothesis 3: Normative Commitment

A hierarchical multiple regression was performed to test the following null

hypothesis:

. There is no linear relationship between normative commitment and the

following set of variables: gender, job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support.

The final analysis regressed the four predictors on the normative commitment

scores. These results may be found in Table 7. The ANOVA portion of this table

indicated that models 2 (job satisfaction), 3 (job involvement), and 4 (POS), were all

significant (p = .00 in all models). In addition, the R

change statistics showed that after

the initial model containing only gender, all subsequent variables added significant

amounts of explained variance to the models (model 2, R

2 change

=.133, p = .00; model 3,

2 change

=.081, p = .00; model 4, R

2 change

=.023, p = .03). Model 4 explained the largest

amount of variance in the normative commitment scores, approximately 22% as indicated

by the adjusted R

, and was further studied to assess the relative contributions of gender,

job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived organizational support.

The coefficients in Table 7 provide a comparison of the four predictors regarding

their impact on the normative commitment scores. Three of the four predictors were

significant as follows, in order of their Beta weights from the largest to the smallest: (a)

job involvement (β = .29, p = .00), (b) job satisfaction (β = .27, p = .00), and (c)

perceived organizational support (β = .18, p = .03). As these coefficients demonstrated,

102

higher levels of job involvement, job satisfaction, and perceived organizational support

were all related to higher levels of normative commitment. Only gender was found to be

not significantly related to normative commitment. Table 7 outlines the results of the

study related to normative commitment.

Table 7

Regression Results for Four Predictors of Normative Commitment

Adjusted R

p p

Model R

Change F Change ANOVA

1 .000 -.006 .000 .88 .88

2 .133 .122 .133 .00** .00**

3 .214 .200 .081 .00** .00**

4 .237 .218 .023 .03* .00**

Unstandardized Standardized

Coefficients Coefficients

Model 4 B SE β t p

(Constant) -.05 4.11 -.01 .99

Gender .64 1.42 .03 .45 .65

JSS .08 .03 .27 3.37 .00**

JIS .28 .07 .29 4.22 .00**

POSS .17.08 .18 2.21 .03*

103

Note. JSS= Job Satisfaction Scores; JIS= Job Involvement Scores; POSS= Perceived

Organizational Support Scores * p < .05, ** p < .01

The first null hypothesis combined the four predictor variables used in this

study while the remainder of the nulls hypothesizes no relationship between

organizational commitment and each of the predictors on an individual basis. For

purposes of statistical analysis, however, the four predictors were combined as per the

first null hypothesis, since the selected technique (hierarchical multiple regression)

allowed for the examination of the combined and individual relationships between

predictors and outcome. Yet multiple regression allowed for an analysis of only one

outcome variable. The outcome variable, as defined in this study, consisted of three

factors: affective, continuance, and normative organizational commitment. Thus three

hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to test the null hypotheses of

this study, one for each of the commitment outcomes.

Four models were tested in each analysis with the blocks entered as follows: (a)

gender, (b) total job satisfaction score, 3. total job involvement score, and (c) total

perceived organizational support score. Choosing the order of the variables was important

and was based on logical considerations. Gender was entered first because it was the only

demographic variable in the study and in the review of the literature related to

organizational commitment, there was little evidence found, to support gender as

significant predictor of organizational commitment. By entering gender first it removed

the effect of any variance due to gender on organizational commitment. In addition, by

adding this variable early in the analysis, made it possible to determine what job

104

satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived organizational support specifically added to

the equation.

In the continued review of the literature by the researcher, it was discovered that

job satisfaction was the most common variable identified to have the greatest impact on

organizational support; therefore, it was chosen to be entered next for analysis.

Job involvement was one of the primary variables of interest for the researcher.

Although the literature review indicated significant findings to the dependent variable;

the researcher chose job involvement as the next variable to be entered with the

assumption that job involvement would prove to be a significant predictor of

organizational commitment.

Perceived organizational support was the last predictor entered. It was entered last

based on the support as evidenced by the literature review. It was the variable of most

interest to the researcher and she was interested in determining to what extent this

variable was related to organizational commitment.

The Hierarchical Regression technique is based on theory and experience with the

predictors. Stepwise Regression is based on statistical considerations, in that the variable

most strongly correlated with the dependent variable is entered first. The researcher used

the hierarchical regression method intending to examine the unique amount of variance

added by each of the individual predictors.

The statistics are such that it was difficult to organize this section along the lines

of the hypotheses, for in fact all three hypotheses were tested with each regression

105

analysis. Thus, these results were grouped and presented by regression analyses for the

three organizational commitment subscales.

Chapter Summary

Chapter 4 presented the results for the descriptive statistical data and the

inferential analyses conducted to examine the hypotheses of this study. Three hierarchical

multiple regressions were performed to test the three hypotheses of the study. Hypotheses

were partially supported. Job involvement was found to be positively related to all three

measures of organizational commitment which included affective, continuance, and

normative subscale scores. Job satisfaction was also positively related to affective and

normative subscale scores, but not to continuance commitment scores. Gender only

evidenced a relationship with continuance scores, with females tending to have higher

continuance scores than males. Perceived organizational support was positively related to

normative scores, but none of the other organizational commitment subscales.

Chapter 5 discusses the results presented in chapter 4 and relates the findings of

the study to previous research on organizational commitment. Furthermore, implications

for social change, specific recommendation for this population, and for future research

are discussed.

106

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

This chapter presents a summary of the study conducted among elementary,

middle, secondary, and post-secondary educators in the North Alabama area. The

conclusions that have been drawn as a result of the study are interpreted and expanded on

in this chapter. The limitations of the study are discussed in detail. The significance of the

findings are discussed in length that may be generalized to educational systems.

Implications for practice in education and people centered organizations are discussed.

Finally, relevant recommendations for future research related to organizational

commitment are also outlined.

Summary

This study examined job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived

organizational support as predictors of affective, continuance, and normative

commitment among educators. Organizational commitment is a continuous process that

develops over time (Blau, 1964). Employees begin to process commitment cognitively

even before they officially join a given organization based upon perceptions, the

organization’s reputation, and the organization’s social status within the education

community (Chang & Choi, 2007; Freund, 2005).

The foundational premise of organizational commitment as a process is grounded

in the assumption that attitudes of commitment lead to commitment behaviors and

commitment behaviors, both voluntary and involuntary, eventually impact the level of

107

effort on the part of an employee (Idsoe, 2006; Joiner et al., 2006; Shanock &

Eisenberger, 2006). It was assumed that it is more likely for a committed employee to

make greater contributions to the organization. Once employees join an organization it is

their daily interactions, formal and informal professional encounters, and experiences

with coworkers, supervisors, leadership, clients, and the system in general that becomes

the primary influential factors that indeed affect their level of affective, continuance, and

normative organizational commitment (Caselman et al., 2007; Chen et al., 2007;Kacmar

et al., 2003).

Commitment is an interrelated process that is essential for a successful

organization. Members and leadership may change, but the value system, work ethic,

standards of expectations, positive constituents, and public perceptions for the

organization must remain in tack, in order for the organization to improve and be

enhanced on a continuum (Blau, 1964; Eisenberger et al., 2002). Workplace settings in

most organizations may vary, but each subunit must be lead to feel as though they are a

unique part of the greater institution, made up by the total sum of its parts (Blau, 1964;

Clay-Warner et al., 2005; Collier & Esteban, 2007; Eisenberger et al., 2002; Feather &

Rauter, 2004). Organizational success is codependent on employee commitment and

because employees are people and not machines, it is often critical for organizations to

treat employees as such (Van Dick et al., 2007; Vandenberghe, et al., 2003; Van Wyk et

al., 2003). According to Mowday et al. (1982) employees who perform outside of their

assigned duties and responsibilities often do so for personal ownership, workmanship

pride, unit pride, indebtedness to the organization, and reciprocal commitment. The

108

greater the contributions related to commitment of each employee undoubtedly in many

cases, depends on their level of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the

organization.

The theoretical framework for the study was based on the Social Exchange and

the LMX theories. Based on the results of the study, it was concluded that the social

exchange and leader-member exchanges are the driving forces that mediate and primarily

influence, employee organizational commitment. Specifically, job satisfaction, job

involvement, and perceived organizational support were identified as primary drivers of

commitment. As previous research indicated, there is consistent evidence of a

relationship between perceptions of support, employee-employer indebtedness, and

coworker interactions as predictors of organizational commitment. Specifically,

researchers have found that LMX is related to job satisfaction, and organizational

commitment (Abbott et al., 2006; Dienesch & Liden, 1986).

Based on the social exchange and the LMX theories, institutional exchanges

promote a bond where both parties involved in the exchange, find the relationship

beneficial. In addition, from the social exchange perspective, when the employee’s

emotional support and expected resource needs are met, including their basic need for

safety and belonging, a significant level of affective commitment should be expected

(Blau, 1964; Chen et al., 2007; Fox & Fallen, 2003; Neves & Caetano, 2006).

Three hypotheses were chosen for this study related to three types of

organizational commitment including: affective, continuance, and normative

109

commitment. The affective, continuance, and normative subscales of the TCM Employee

Commitment Survey were used to measure organizational commitment.

It was hypothesized that higher affective commitment scores as measured by the

TCM Employee Survey’s Affective Commitment Subscale would be related to gender,

higher job satisfaction, higher job involvement, and higher perceived organizational

support. This hypothesis was partially supported. Based on the results of this study,

higher scores of job satisfaction and higher scores of job involvement were statistically

related to higher scores of affective organizational commitment. However, there was no

significant relationship found between gender, perceived organizational support, and

affective commitment.

In the workplace environment, employees may perceive they are being treated

unfairly and their personal expectations are not met. This perception may effect

workplace attitudes, interactions, and perhaps even influence an employee’s decision to

leave or remain with the organization. Many employees have little choice in deciding

whether to remain or leave an organization based on family, economics, and or other

significant obligations (Blau, 1964; Blau & Meyer, 1987). According to the Social

Exchange and LMX theories, the higher the quality of workplace interactions such as

collaborations and team approaches that demonstrate mutual respect could produce:

pride, commitment, dedication, esteem, and employee productivity. It is assumed that the

most critical factor impacting the employee-employer relationship is a vested interest

based on mutual exchanges of trust, indebtedness, equality, and fairness; which, all have

110

been identified as factors that lead to deeper bond and higher levels of organizational

commitment (Blau & Meyer, 1987; Lawler & Thye, 1999; Mauer, et al., 2002).

It was also hypothesized that there would be a relationship between higher

continuance commitment as measured by the Continuance Commitment Subscale of the

TCM Employee Commitment Survey and gender, higher job satisfaction, higher job

involvement, and higher perceived support. The hypothesis was partially supported. The

results of the study indicated that females have higher scores of job involvement and

higher continuance commitment when compared to their male counterparts. There was no

significant relationship found between, job satisfaction, perceived organizational support

and continuance commitment.

Employees often have to weigh the cost of leaving versus staying with an

organization. The social exchange theory proposes that employee behaviors are guided by

reciprocity (Blau, 1964). In the case of females reporting higher scores of commitment, it

was proposed that females have more gratitude and are aware of the fringe benefits

provided by the organization to meet their personal and professional needs. Some needs

may include counseling, on-site childcare, maternity leave, opportunities to work from

home, and other accommodations that male counterparts may not be inclined to take

advantage of because of their lack of knowledge of all of the services available that

comes along with being a member of their particular organization. Research findings

further suggested that perceived organizational support as a major component from which

employees globally evaluate the employment relationship with the organization (Coyle-

Shapiro & Conway, 2005). Coyle-Shapiro and Conway suggested that future research

111

should examine perceptions of employee and employer obligations. This research should

include the examination employee obligations towards the employer as a form of

indebtedness and the potential relationship to perceived organizational support.

Lastly, it was hypothesized that male educators with higher normative

commitment scores as measured by the TCM Employee Commitment Survey’s

Normative Commitment Subscale, would also have higher job satisfaction, higher job

involvement, and higher perceived organizational support. The hypothesis was partially

supported. The results of the study indicated a significant relationship between higher

normative commitment, higher job satisfaction, higher job involvement, and higher

perceived organizational support. No significant relationship was found between gender

and normative commitment.

Based on the results of the study, employee perception of organizational support

does impact organizational commitment. In many cases, it is that perceived support that

enables the employee to effectively complete required tasks and increase productivity

during organizational economic and enrollment hardships. This perception of support,

good or bad, can ultimately impact the quality of work being produced by the employee

and the success of the organization’s overall effectiveness.

The literature review for this study provided evidence of job involvement as a

newer, yet, significant predictor of organizational commitment (Kanungo, 1982; Hafer &

Martin, 2006; Wegge et al., 2007). Job involvement is considered an employee’s

psychological connection to his or her job. It further emphasizes how interested,

enmeshed, and engrossed he or she is in the goals, culture, and tasks of the organization

112

as a whole (Joiner & Bakalis, 2006; Kanungo, 1982). Specifically, Idsoe (2006) found

that employees preferred job involvement at the systematic level because it provided

opportunities for networking, collaboration, mutual exchanges, and feedback from of a

diverse group of individuals who were also a part of the larger organization.

In relation to the results of the Job Satisfaction Survey and the three types of

organizational commitment it was interesting to note the consensus among the responses

of the educators. Specifically educators reported that the nature of work, supervision, and

coworker interactions as the areas in which they were significantly satisfied. The

conclusion was drawn that if these three needs were met, employers could expect a

highly satisfied workforce. In contrast to areas of satisfaction, educator responses to

questions in this study related to pay and promotion on the JSS indicated that these were

the two areas in which they were least satisfied.

Consistent with the results of this study, Clay-Warner et al.’s (2005) research on

organizational justice and job satisfaction reported that similar job characteristics such as

job autonomy, job complexity, and coworker support, predicted higher levels of job

satisfaction. Specifically, procedural justice and the level of fairness in the methods by

which rewards were distributed among employees by the organization at the discretion of

the supervisors directly impacted an employee’s level of satisfaction. Clay-Warner et al.

indicated that studies of job satisfaction could be improved by highlighting connections

between job satisfaction, organizational justice, and supervisors who want satisfied

workers. Employers must practice procedural justice in ordered to gain stronger

commitment from their employees.

113

The Makanjee et al. (2006) study on organizational commitment among

diagnostic imaging radiographers also supported the outcome of this study which

indicated that employees who were least satisfied with pay and opportunities for

promotion were also the employees who reported low levels of job satisfaction. Few

incentives were likely to lead to decreased morale and feelings of distress. This outcome

demonstrated greater relevance to this study because employees with low affection and

increased feelings of distress reportedly, also represented those employees who were less

committed to a given organization.

Freund (2005) examined commitment and job satisfaction among welfare

workers. It was found that job satisfaction was not as a strong predictor of organizational

commitment as career commitment. Freund found that job satisfaction was the most

meaningful factor that greatly influenced withdrawal intentions of employees.

Dissatisfied employees developed less commitment behavioral characteristics and were

less likely to make positive investments personally and professionally in the organization.

The literature review of job satisfaction indicated a codependent relationship

between job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Specifically, if employees felt

like the organization had a vested interest in their personal and professional welfare,

studies showed that employees were more likely to not only feel satisfied but, also secure

enough to weather the storm of organizational change (Somech & Ron, 2007;Valle &

Witt, 1992) . Changes and the decision to make sacrificial compromises on the behalf of

the organization may include key job satisfaction indicators such as pay, promotion, and

fringe benefits during organizational hardships (Truckenbodt, 2000; Wayne et al., 2002).

114

An example of such a sacrifice would be an agreement to participate in an institutional

wide furlough to keep the organization financially stable and running for an extended

period of time (Parker Ayers, 2009). This level of commitment and willingness to endure

the tides of hardships, were also more likely of employees with higher levels of job

satisfaction versus employees who report lower levels of job satisfaction (Abbott et al.,

2006; Clay-Warner et al., 2005; Freund, 2005).

Scott et al. (2003) conducted job satisfaction research among Chinese workers

and found empirical results that supported the current hypothesis identified in this study

that employees who have higher levels of job satisfaction also had lower intentions to

leave the organization. These intentions demonstrated behavioral characteristics that

could assumingly support the notion that an employee’s level of commitment to his or her

organization is associated with high levels of job satisfaction. The empirical results of

Scott et al.’s study among Chinese employees generally mirrored the role of job

satisfaction and organizational commitment in workplaces in organizations across the

U.S.

Conclusions and Interpretations

A total of 171 educators participated in this study. The majority of the

respondents were female (74.3%). The results related to gender were unique in that in

previous studies and other literature related to organizational commitment, the majority

of respondents were male (Sorensen & Stuart, 2000). The respondents represented

educators employed at the elementary, middle, secondary, and post-secondary levels of

education. With consideration to the profession of education, the gender response rate

115

may be directly related to the fact that education is a female-dominated profession

(Somech & Ron, 2007).The literature review also revealed that similar to this study,

regardless of the type organization or industry research related to organizational

commitment women were the primary respondents (Freund, 2005; Joiner, 2006;

Makanjee et al., 2006; Scott et al., 2003). Makanjee et al. studied commitment behaviors

among diagnostic imaging radiographers and found a majority of their respondents were

female. The Joiner and Bakalis (2006) investigation of commitment among graduate

assistance found that 64% of the respondents to the survey were female.

In this study, the majority (66.7%) of the respondents were tenured. In education,

tenure is considered a special professional attainment (Parker Ayers, 2009). It often

serves as a protective measure to maintain one’s employment status within a given

educational institution and makes the difference regarding employees who will be laid

off, compared to employees who may be offered the opportunity for early retirement and

or given various options to remain with the organization during hardships (Abbott et al.,

2006; Somech & Ron, 2007).

In regards to level of degree earned 39.2% of the respondents had earned a

master’s degree. Over 70% of the educators demonstrated their commitment to education

by seeking education beyond the minimum required degree at the bachelor’s level.

Ninety-eight point eight percent of the respondents worked in the public sector. In

relation to job description, teachers accounted for the majority of the respondents at the

rate of 52%. This was also an interesting finding because it was assumed that teachers

have a detailed structure, timelines, and many duties that did not provide the time to

116

complete a survey that was voluntary in nature. Given the time the survey was released,

during the month of May when final exams, graduation, and other state mandated

documents are due for all educators, the high response rate from teachers was

unexpected. In addition, in the case of this study, various administrators on the

secondary-level predicted that there would be little or no responses from teachers because

of their already overwhelming schedules. They were reminded by the researcher that

participation was on a voluntary basis. Perhaps the use of the incentive prompted the

unexpected response rate. The mean age of the respondents was 48.25.

The average years of teaching experience for the respondents for this study was

15.36 and the mean years in their current organization was 11.08. The results from this

sample population indicated that many of the educators reported various levels of

affective, continuance, and normative commitment.

The examination of the major hypothesis of this study showed that the outcomes

were partially supported. The Hierarchical Regression analysis of affective commitment

showed that there is a relationship between job satisfaction, job involvement, and

affective commitment. Although higher job satisfaction was the most significant

contributor, higher levels of job involvement were also significantly related to higher

levels of affective commitment. Gender and POS were not significantly related to

affective commitment.

The ANOVA results of continuance commitment showed that female educators

with higher levels of job involvement tended to also have higher levels of continuance

117

commitment. Job satisfaction and POS were not significantly related to continuance

commitment; therefore, demonstrating partial support of the major research hypothesis.

Three hierarchical regression analyses used to test the independent variables

identified in the study and to test the prediction of normative organizational commitment

among educators. The results indicated that the higher the level of job involvement, job

satisfaction, and perceived organizational support the higher level of normative

commitment was found. Gender was the only independent variable found that was not

significantly related to normative commitment.

This study has provided statistically significant findings that partially support the

major research hypothesis. Because educators operate within a larger system, frontline

workers (classroom teachers and professors) are typically the last to be informed

regarding the state of the institution at any given time because they are focused on

attending to the needs of their students. It is clear that being satisfied with one’s job as an

educator, becoming more involved beyond required duties, and establishing a trustful and

reciprocal positive relationship between the employee and employer is key to

organizational commitment. This study has further contributed to the body of literature

regarding organizational commitment by providing specific variables individually and

collectively that predict affective, continuance, and normative organizational

commitment. Moreover, it provided a solid statistical foundation for future research in

education, and the expansion of future studies in organizational commitment across a

variety of settings.

118

Limitations, Assumptions, and Scope of the Study

Similar to most research studies, this study possessed various limitations. The

most common limitation of survey related research is that the data collected is self

reported which may result in false negative and or false positive responses. The limitation

was also applicable to this study. Although the online survey’s invitation indicated that

the respondents identity would not be revealed, because of a lack of trust within many

organizations, as a limitation, potential participants my have chosen not to participate in

the study because of fear related to retaliation.

Another limitation is that the results of this study may not be generalized to other

types of organizations because the study was conducted among educators who worked on

the elementary, middle, secondary, and post-secondary levels of education and who

successfully received the invitation to complete the survey via e-mail.

Although the sample of 171 was adequate for statistical analysis caution should be

noted that it represented a smaller portion of the population initially proposed for the

study. Although the results yielded valuable information, perhaps a larger representative

sample from each level of education would have provided other results. It is likely that

because education is a “person centered” organizational system, the dynamics of this

study can not be generalized to other non people centered professions where professional

and interpersonal exchanges are unlikely. Therefore, an employee’s level of commitment

would not be influenced by the variables selected for this study. Nonetheless, employees

who perform well on the job were possibly the typical employees who were also more

willing to participate in work related research studies.

119

The timing of the research was a significant limitation and may have caused a

decreased response rate and the respondent’s willingness to participate because of other

work related obligations. The survey was made available online during the end of the last

semester of the school year. This time is typically hectic for most educators regardless of

the level being taught. Educators were generally preparing for final exams, graduation,

year end personnel evaluations, and summer vacation. In addition, with consideration to

the current economic times and education related budget cut backs, many educators may

not have been motivated to participate in the study as their morale was low based on the

uncertainty of job security and systematic changes that may have influenced their

willingness to participate in activities beyond their expected duties.

The length of questionnaire created another significant limitation. This was

evidenced by at least 4 participants failing to complete the last two 2 pages of the

questionnaire. The survey required that the respondents answer every question posted

which totaled over 80 questions.

The scope of the study was limited because generalizability of this study’s

findings was grossly represented by females and educators in the southern region of the

United States. In addition, like most institutions, Education is a systematic entity that

operates based on a set of rules and governance’s all of its own. Nonetheless, like most

organizations, it still remains a people powered society driven, type of organization.

Significance of Findings

The results of this study yielded many significant findings. The findings were

useful beyond the study’s initial intended purpose, which was to determine if there was a

120

relationship between gender, job satisfaction, job involvement, perceived organizational

commitment as predictors of affective, continuance, and normative organizational

commitment. Based on the study’s findings, educators who had higher levels of job

satisfaction and job involvement also had greater levels of affective organizational

commitment. Specifically employees with strong emotional attachment to the

organization were also more likely to demonstrate higher levels of commitment.

Moreover, members who could identify with the organization were expected to also

demonstrate their commitment by way of higher personal and professional involvement

in the organization.

Based on the results of the current study it was found that female educators with

higher levels of job involvement were also more likely to have higher levels of

continuance commitment. It was assumed that the gender of role of women in general,

supported their perspective, feelings, and attitudes of continuance commitment compared

to men based on role expectations, financial needs of the family, their personal need to

contribute to the workforce and or a female’s need to instinctively make the choice to

remain committed as a part of their personal preference. Job involvement was identified

as the most frequently indicated variable impacting all three levels of organizational

commitment.

Implications for Practice

This study provided a wealth of noteworthy considerations for practice.

Specifically, it provided direct implications for practice among educators on the

elementary, middle, secondary, and post-secondary levels of education. Although the

121

major hypotheses were partially supported, the results of the study identified useful

information regarding specific variables that significantly impact organizational

commitment. In line with previous research, this study also demonstrated that when given

an opportunity (voluntary survey) to support research in their area of interest, people

recognize that while they may not be heard as an individual participating in research

provides valuable information for leaders in organizations.

The results gathered based on this study may be beneficial not only to education

related organizations, but also to the community at large, constituents, and politicians

who seek positions and who are determined to make community-wide improvements on

the local and national level based on scientifically sound research.

This study provided useful information to educational systems on the elementary,

middle, secondary, and post-secondary levels of education in Madison County in the state

of Alabama. Social change in of itself does not occur without the valuable input from all

members of society. Perhaps the community and other interested parties may be willing

to take a closer look at job characteristic components within organizations that influence

the operation the large system that drives change. As research similar to this study

provided vital information of social change, community leaders and citizens may

recognize the value of increased taxes, the importance of increased personal financial

contributions, and perhaps it nothing else, recognize the value of their vested interest and

become more active as a change agent who could make a difference in educator affective,

continuance, and normative commitment. Ultimately, administrators may have the final

piece to the puzzle to assist educators by providing opportunities for increased job

122

involvement, higher job satisfaction, and higher levels of perceived organizational

support as they have been identified as significant factors that influence organizational

commitment among educators.

Based on the current study’s results, leadership acknowledgement, opportunities

for job involvement, and willingness to accept and implement change based on the needs

of the members that make up the organization; could lead to collaborative change, a more

qualified workforce, and more importantly, the advancement of the organization to

benefit the population it serves.

Job involvement is an individual predictor of organizational commitment that has

been identified as a result of this study. It is critical that employees and employers

recognize specific characteristics that this predictor entails. As a key factor impacting

organizational commitment on the affective, continuance, and normative levels, job

involvement promotes employee and employer responsibility for the success of the

organization. Job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceptions of support from the

organization can not be ignored. Educational organizations should use this useful

information as an opportunity to enhance, create, and promote positive organizational

attitudes, effectiveness, and change. The information yielded was not only vital to

educators, but also to employers that desire a more committed team of practitioners.

Moreover, the study’s findings could be used to help improve, refine, and examine

closely employment practices that may need revising, criteria objectives for new

employees, the morale of employees, and the training and professional development of

existing employees lacking motivation and commitment because of low levels of job

123

satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived organizational support. The results of this

study demonstrated the need to invoke employee engagement in order to maintain and

promote higher levels of affective, continuance, and normative commitment.

Previous studies did not dispute facts related to factors that may influence

employee commitment (Blau & St. John, 1993; Caselman & Brandt, 2007; Coyle-Shapiro

& Conway, 2005; Somech & Ron, 2007). Based on the results of this study, educators

similar to other industries employees have a need for job satisfaction, job involvement,

and perceived organizational in order to accomplish many of the surmounting tasks and

challenges that are laid before them in this 21

century workforce Caselman & Brandt,

2007). Research studies have indicated that some employees can not endure many of the

sacrifices that may come along with the unique demands of commitment like decrease in

salaries, budget cuts, doing more with less, and unpaid overtime. But, be assured that the

research also indicated that there were many committed employees who remained and

continued employment with organizations simply for the love of the organization. It is

clear, affective, continuance, and normative commitment are byproducts of the quality of

exchanges between the employee and the organization. Those byproducts will ultimately

influence the level of success, longevity, and opportunities for success as an organization

for generations to come.

Future Research

The results of this study partially support the major hypothesis and similar to past

studies, specific variables such as job involvement and job satisfaction continue to be

identified as factors that influenced employee organizational commitment (Hafer &

124

Martin, 2006; Idose, 2006; Neves & Caetano, 2006; Van Dick et al., 2007). Identifying

the interrelated factors impacting organizational commitment could be the most crucial

and powerful evaluation tool yet, an organization may have that is desperately seeking

the formula that guides or predicts it’s people power in the equation of organizational

success. Most organizations share a group of established connectedness. This study has

identified factors of commonality that organizations could use to better focus their efforts

and attention towards a collective and committed workforce. While many institutions,

organizations, and industries have a mission and various objectives, many organizations

continue to function as an individual industry that stands alone. Organizational leaders,

supervisors, and employees must examine closely the value of a joint venture and its

benefits of all parties involved. The major research question that continues to plague the

specialization of organizational psychology is, can organizations survive with low

commitment levels from employees? The answer unfortunately is, yes. However, the real

question should be whether or not organizations can reach the pinnacle of their

organization’s success, remain competitive, meet the demands of their market with low

levels of affective, continuance, and normative organizational commitment? The research

says, no.

Although previous studies mentioned limitations related to the lack of

generalizability, it is important to note that this study and similar studies in other types of

organizations have resulted in significantly similar findings. The replication of this study

is recommended to examine the difference of commitment overtime once the variables

that have been identified as predictors of higher levels of commitment have been

125

adequately addressed through intervention strategies to improve organizational

commitment.

Systematic intervention strategies at each individual level of education are needed

and if educators are not provided with sufficient resources and above substandard

facilities whether in the classroom, laboratory, or the music room, it is unlikely that

educators will report higher levels of commitment. Specifically, future research should

expand on the organization’s use of climate survey feedback and its impact on employee

commitment. In addition, focus should be directed towards employee feedback and its

relationship to organizational commitment as many educators who complete the survey

may feel as though they are merely going through the annual “process” of evaluation.

The development of protocol systems that are mandatory to help drive systematic

changes and evaluate feedback forms based on the training and development seminars

and workshops employees have attended should also be a future consideration. This

should help to gauge the needs of not only the educator, but also academic units, a

specific school or system, grade level, and student learning outcomes should also be

addressed. Future studies may also identify additional areas in education that may

improve attitudinal workplace behaviors.

More specifically, departmental and administrative support units on the post-

secondary level of education should be addressed such as Counseling and Development,

Student Retention, and Admission Offices to ensure adequate student learning outcomes

are realistic for the body students for which the educational organization is providing

services. When educators are forced to remediate, provide crisis counseling, and other

126

duties for which they should not be liable, it is likely that the lack of those resources

would cause a role strain, further impacting their level of organizational commitment.

Future studies examining commitment and its relationship to availability of

necessary tools, resources, adequate facilities, and access to adequate funding to provide

superior education should also be examined. In many cases, the resources available for

students to complete required assignments are not locally accessible. By ensuring

adequate funding is available for the purchasing of learning resource instruments, books,

and tools on-site (campus), may actually motivate student learning, decrease the

frustrations among educators and students, and increase the level of job involvement, job

satisfaction, and the perceived organizational support of many educators.

The research may also extend to examine whether or not the level of educational

preparedness (degree) is related to employee commitment. In general, it would be

beneficial to explore the variables used in this study as predictors of organizational

commitment in other types of organizations, industries, and educational organizations in

the north region of the United States. It may also be beneficial to examine organizational

commitment with a large sample size and for the sake of comparisons, examine further,

the complexity of these interactions.

Future investigations of job involvement and organization commitment could be

very valuable to Education as a discipline, administrators, and society at large as systemic

improvements are sought to increase levels of affective, continuance, and normative

commitment among educators. In addition, the three primary subscales of job satisfaction

indicated factors that increase job satisfaction, but factors that influenced dissatisfaction

127

were also identified and should be investigated further as predictors of organizational

commitment.

In conclusion, this study sought to investigate the relationship between gender,

job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived organizational support as predictors of

organizational commitment. The results of the current study revealed that a very unique

relationship between job satisfaction, job involvement, perceived organizational support

and organizational commitment indeed exists. Regardless of the type of organization, the

results of this study highlighted the fact that employees do have perceptions of

organizations that may ultimately affect attitudinal behaviors and the success of the

organization. Attention to the relationships identified in this study should serve as a

spring board for future studies seeking to improve the quality of education as a system,

by providing interventions that forge higher commitment among educators, the masters of

that plight. By increasing educator commitment, a surge should also spark the movement

of social change, by increasing job involvement, job satisfaction, perceptions of

organizational support, and dedication to a profession cultivated for global service to all

humanity.

128

REFERENCES

Abbott, J. B., Boyd, N. G., & Miles, G. (2006). Does type of team matter? An

investigation of the relationships between job characteristics and outcomes within

a team-based environment. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146(4), 485-507.

Afza, M. (2005). Superior-subordinate relationships and satisfaction in Indian small

business enterprises. Vikalpa, 30(3), 11-19.

Allen, D. G., & Griffeth, R. W. (1999). Job performance and turnover: A review and

Integrative multi-route model. Human Resource Management Review, 9(4), 525-

549.

Amerikaner, M., Elliot, D., & Swank, P. (1988). Social interest as a predictor of

vocational satisfaction. Individual Psychology 44(3), 316-323.

Baron, J. N., Hannan, M. T., & Burton, D. M. (2001). Labor pains: Change in

organizational models and employee turnover in young, high-tech firms.

American Journal of Sociology, 106(4), 960-1013.

Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley and Sons.

Blau, P.M., & Meyer, M. W. (1987). Bureaucracy in modern society. (3

ed.). New

York, NY: Random House.

Blau, P.M., Paul, A., & St. John, N. (1993). On developing a general index of work

commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42(3), 298-314.

Brough, P., & Frame, R. (2004). Predicting police job satisfaction and turnover

intentions: The role of social support and police organizational variables. New

Zealand Journal of Psychology, 33(1), 6-14.

Bragg, T. (2002). Improve employee commitment. Industrial Management, 44(4), 18-22.

Caselman, D. T., & Brandt, M. D. (2007). School social workers intent to stay. School

Social Work Journal, 31(2), 33-48.

Chang, J., & Choi, J. (2007). The dynamic relation between organizational and

professional commitment of highly educated research and development

professional. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147(3), 299-315.

Chen, J., Silverworth, C., & Hung, J. (2006). Organizational communication, job stress,

129

organizational commitment, and job performance of accounting professionals in

Taiwan and America. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 27(4),

242-249.

Chen, S., Lin, P., Lu, C., & Taso, C. (2007). The moderation effect of hr strength on the

relationship between employee commitment and job performance. Social

Behavior and Personality, 35(8), 1121-1138.

Chen, Z., Tsui. A. S., & Farh, J. (2002). Loyalty to supervisor vs. organizational

commitment: Relationships to employee performance in china. Journal of

Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 75(3), 339-357.

Clay-Warner, J., Reynolds, J., & Roman, P. (2005). Organizational justice and job

satisfaction: A test of three competing models. Social Justice Research, 18(4),

391-409.

Coleman, M. (2003). Gender and the orthodoxies of leadership. School Leadership &

Management, 23(3), 325-339.

Collier, J., & Esteban, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and employee

commitment. Business ethics: A European Review. Journal of Compilation,

16(1), 19-33.

Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and

analyses issues for field settings: Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Coyle-Shapiro, J., & Conway, N. (2005). Exchange relationships: Examining

psychological contacts and perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 90(4), 774-781.

Deluga, R. J. (1994). Supervisor trust building, leader-member exchange and

organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Occupational & Organizational

Psychology, 67(4), 315-327.

Dienesch, R. M., & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership:

A critique and further development. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 618-

634.

Druckman, D. (1998). Social exchange theory: Premises and prospects. International

Negotiation, 3, 253-266.

Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational

130

support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 82(5), 812-820.

Eisenberger, R. & Huntington, R. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500-507.

Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I., & Rhoades, L.

(2002). Perceived organizational support: Contributions to perceived

organizational support and employee retention. Journal of Applied Psychology,

87(3), 565-573.

Elloy, D. F., Everett, J.E., & Flynn. R.W. (1995). Multi-dimensional mapping of the

correlates of job involvement. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 27(1),

79-91.

Erdogan, B., Kraimer, M.L., & Liden, R. C. (2002). Person-organization fit and work

attitudes. The moderating role of leader-member exchange. Academy of

Management Proceedings Membership Directory, F1-F6.

Farrell, S. K., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2007). Organizational citizenship behavior and

gender: Expectations and attributions for performance. North American Journal of

Psychology, 9(1), 81-95.

Feather, N.T., & Rauter, A. K. (2004). Organizational citizenship behaviors in relation to

job status, job insecurity, organizational commitment and identification, job

satisfaction and work values. Journal of Occupational and Organizational

Psychology, 77(1), 81-94.

Fox, S., & Fallen, B. J. (2003). Modeling the effect work/life balance on job satisfaction

and turnover intentions. Australian Journal of Psychology, 55, 123-125.

Freund, A. (2005). Commitment of job satisfaction as predictors of turnover intentions

among welfare workers. Administration in Social Work, 29(2), 5-21.

Fuller, J. B., Barnett, T., Hester, K., & Relyea, C. (2003). A social identity perspective on

the relationship between perceived organizational support and organizational

commitment. Journal of Social Psychology, 143(6), 789-792.

Gagon, M.A., & Michael, J.H.(2004). Outcomes of perceived organizational support for

wood production employees. Forest Products Journal, 54(12), 172-177.

Gaziel, H. H. (2004). Predictors of absenteeism among primary school teachers. Social

Psychology of Education, 7,421-434.

131

Graddick, M.M., & Farr, L. J. (1983). Professionals in scientific disciplines: Sex related

differences in working life commitments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4),

641-645.

Graen, G. (1976). A role making processes within complex organizations.

In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.) Handbook of Industrial Organizational Psychology.

Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

Hafer, J. C. & Martin, T. N. (2006). Job involvement or affective commitment: A

sensitivity analysis study of apathetic employee mobility. Institute of Behavioral

and Applied Management, September, 1-19.

Hallberg, U. E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Same but different? Can work

engagement be discriminated from job involvement and organizational

commitment. European Psychologist, 11(2), 119-127.

Hofmann, D.A., & Morgeson, F.P. (1999). Safety related behaviors as a social exchange:

The role of perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(2), 286-296.

Hofmann, D. A., Morgeson, F. P., & Gerras, S. J. (2003). Climate as a moderator of the

relationship between leader-member exchange and content specific citizenship:

Safety climate as a exemplar. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 170-178.

Huselid, A. M. & Day, N.E. (1991). Organizational commitment, job involvement, and

turnover: A substantive and methodological analysis. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 76(3), 380-391.

Idsoe, T. (2006). Job aspects in the school psychology service: Empirically distinct

associations with positive challenge at work, perceived control at work, and job

attitudes. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(1), 46-

72.

Jackofsky, E. F. (1984). Turnover and job performance: An integrated process model.

Academy of Management Review, 9(1), 74-83.

Jancic, Z., & Zabkar, (2002). Impersonal vs. personal exchanges in marketing

relationships. Journal of Marketing Management, 18(7), 657-671.

Joiner, T. A., & Bakalis, S. (2006). The antecedents of organizational commitment: The

case of Australian casual academics. International Journal of Educational

Management, 20, 439-452.

132

Kacmar, K. M., Witt, L.A., Zivnuska, S., & Gully, S. M. (2003). The interactive effect of

leader-member exchange and communication frequency on performance ratings.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 764-772.

Kanungo, R.N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 67(3), 341-349.

Karrasch, A. I. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment.

Military Psychology, 15(3), 225-236.

Karsh, B., Booske, B.C., & Sainfort, F. (2005). Job and organizational determinants of

nursing home employee commitment, job satisfaction and intent to turnover.

Ergonomics, 48(10) 1260-1281.

Kidd, J.M., & Smewing, C. (2001). The role of the supervisor in career and

organizational commitment. European Journal of Work and Organizational

Psychology, 10(1), 25-40.

Lawler, E. J., & Thye, S. R. (1999). Bringing emotions into social exchange theory.

Annual Review of Sociology, 25(1), 217-245.

Locke, E.A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette

(Ed.),Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1297-1349).

Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

Lynch, P.D., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (1999). Perceived organizational support:

inferior versus superior performance by wary employees. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 84(4), 467-481.

Nagy, M. S. (2002). Using a single item approach to measure facet job satisfaction.

Organizational Psychology, 75(1), 77-88.

Neves, P. & Caetano, A. (2006). Social exchange processes in organizational change:

The roles of trust and control. Journal of Change Management, 6(4), 351-364.

Nicholson, N. (2003). How to motivate your problem people. Harvard Business Review,

81(1), 56-66.

Nord, W. (2001). Adam smith and contemporary social exchange theory. American

Journal of Economics and Sociology, 32(4), 421-436.

Makanjee, R.C., Hartzer, Y., & Uys, I. (2006). The effect of perceived organizational

133

support on organizational commitment of diagnostic imaging radiographers.

Radiography, 12(2), 118-126.

Marcus, M.P., & House, J. S. (1973). Exchange between superiors and subordinates in

large organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(2), 209-222.

Mauer, T. J., Pierce, H. R., & Shore, L. M. (2002). Perceived beneficiary of employee

development activity: A three dimensional social exchange model. Academy of

Management Review, 27(3), 432-445.

McFarlane, L., Thornton, G. C., & Newton, L. A. (1989). Job satisfaction and

organizational commitment as predictors of behavioral intentions and employee

behaviors. Academy of Management Proceedings, 11(1), 229-234.

Meyer, J., P., & Allen, N. J., (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory research, and

application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M., & Porter, L.W. (1979). The measurement of organizational

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-227.

Munro, B.H, Vistintainer, M.A., & Page, E.B. (1986) Statistical methods for heath care

research. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Company.

Muller, B. H., & Lee, J. (2002). Leader-member exchange and organizational

communication satisfaction in multiple contexts. The Journal of Business

Communication, 39(2), 220-244.

Obeng, K., & Ugboro, I. (2003). Organizational commitment among public transit

employees: An assessment study. Transportation Quarterly, 57(2), 83-98.

O’Driscoll, M. P., Poelmans, S., Spector, P. E., Kalliath, T., Allen, T. D., Cooper, C. L.,

& Sanchez, J. I. (2003). Family responsive interventions, perceived organizational

support, work-family conflict, and psychological strain. International Journal of

Stress Management, 10(4), 326-344.

Parnell, J. A., & Crandall, W. (2003). Propensity for Participative decision-making, job

satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, and

intentions to leave among Egyptian managers. The Multinational Business

Review, 11(1), 45-65.

134

Rhoades, L. & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the

literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698-714.

Saleh, S. & Hosek, J. (1976). Job Involvement: Concepts and measurements. Academy of

Management Journal, 19, 213-224.

Scott, D.K., Bishop, J.W., & Chen, X. (2003). An examination of the relationship of

employee involvement with job satisfaction, employee cooperation, and intention

to quit in us invested enterprise in china. The International Journal of

Organizational Analysis, 11(1) 3-19.

Shanock, L. R., & Eisenberger, R. (2006). When supervisors feel supported: relationships

with subordinates perceived organizational support, perceived organizational

support, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 689-695.

Settoon, R.P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R.C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations:

Perceived organizational support, leader-member exchange, and employee

reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(3), 219-227.

Shore, L. M., & Wayne, S. J. (1993). Commitment and employee behavior: Comparison

of affective commitment and continuance commitment with perceived

organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5), 774-780.

Shore, L. M., Newton, L. A., & Thornton, G. C. III. (1990). Job and organizational

attitudes in relation to employee behavioral intentions. Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 11, 57-67.

Somech, A., & Ron, I. (2007). Promoting organizational citizenship behavior in schools:

The impact of individual and organizational characteristics. Educational

Administrative Quarterly, 43(1), 38-66.

Somers, M., & Birnbaum, D. (2000). Exploring the relationship between commitment

profiles and work attitudes, employee withdrawal and job performance.

Public Personnel Management, 29(30), 353-365.

Sorensen, J. B., & Stuart, T. E. (2000). Aging, obsolescence, and organizational

innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 45, 81-112.

Spector, P.E. (1985). Measurements of human service staff satisfaction: Development of

the job satisfaction survey. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13(6),

693-713.

Steiner, D. D. (2001). Value of perceptions in leader-member exchange. The Journal of

135

Social Psychology, 128(5), 611-618.

Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of Leadership: A survey of theory and research. New

York, NY: The Free Press.

Truckenbrodt, Y. B. (2000). The relationship between leader-member exchange and

commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors. Acquisition Review

Quarterly, Summer, 233-244.

Valle, M., & Witt, L. A. (2001). The moderating effects of teamwork perceptions on the

organizational politics-job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Social Psychology,

141(3), 379-389.

Vandenberghe, C., Bentein, K., Michon, M., Chebat, J., Tremblay, M., & Flis, J. (2007).

An examination of the role of perceived support and employee commitment it

employee-customer encounters. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1177-

1187.

Van der Velde, M. E. G., Bossink, C. J. H, & Jansen, P. G. W. (2003). Gender roles in

the influence of professional and tenure on work attitudes. Sex Roles, 49(34)153-

162.

Van Dick, R., Hirst, Grojean, M.W., & Wieseke (2007). Relationships between leader

and follower organizational identification and implications for follower attitudes

and behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 133-

150.

Van Wyk, R., Boshoff, AB., & Cillers, A. (2003). The prediction of job involvement

for pharmacists and accountants. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29(3), 61-67.

Wayne, S. J., Shore L.M., Bommer, & Terick, L. E. (2002). The role of fair treatment and

rewards in perceptions of organizational support and leader-member exchange.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 590-598.

Wegge, J., Schmidt, K., Parkes, C., Dick, R. (2007). Taking a sickie: Job satisfaction and

job involvement as interactive predictors in absenteeism in a public organization.

Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 80, 77-89.

Whitener, E. (2001). Do high commitment human resource practices affect

employee commitment: A cross level analysis using hierarchical linear modeling.

Journal of Management, 27(5), 515-536.

Witt, A. L., & Nye, L. G. (1992). Gender and the relationship between perceived fairness

136

of pay or promotion and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6),

910-917.

137

APPENDIX A:

LETTER OF INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE STUDY

Dear Educator,

You are invited to take part in a research study examining the role of job satisfaction, job involvement, and

perceived organizational support as predictors of organizational commitment among educators. You were

chosen to participate in this study because you are an educator involved on the elementary, middle,

secondary, or post-secondary level of education.

This study is being conducted by Jennifer Parker Ayers

a faculty member at Alabama A&M University,

and a doctoral candidate in the School of Psychology at Walden University. I am seeking your participation

and support in completing the attached survey instrument, as an integral component in completing the

study.

The result of this study will be invaluable to not only you as an educator, but also to Education as a

discipline, educational institutions, the body of research in organizational commitment, and most

importantly, to the students we serve every day.

Your participation in this study is voluntary. Any information you provide will be anonymous. By clicking

on the link below, you are agreeing to participate in the survey. It will take approximately 10-15 minutes to

complete the survey. If you are not automatically connected with the site by clicking on the link, please

copy and paste the entire link to the address bar of your browser.

Participants who successfully complete the survey will have the opportunity at the end of the survey, to

click on a link provided to enter into a drawing for $100.00 dollar master or visa card.

If you have any questions regarding your rights and privacy, you may contact Dr. Leilani Endicott at

Walden University. Her phone number is 1-800-925-3368, ext. 1210.

Thank you for your attention, and in advance, I appreciate your efforts in doing your part to help promote

social change within education.

(URL link)

Best regards,

Jennifer Parker Ayers

138

APPENDIX B:

DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY

1) What is your age range? 20-29__ 30-39__ 40-49__ 50 & up__

2) What is your gender? Male___ Female___

3) Are you? Tenured___ Non-tenured____

What is your highest level of educational attainment? Bachelor degree ___ Master

degree ___ Educational Specialist degree ___ Doctorate degree ____

5) What is the nature of the organization you represent?

Public sector___ Private sector ___

6) How many years of teaching experience? Less than 2 years ___ 3-5 years ___

6-10 years___ 11-15 years ____ 16 years or more ____

7) How long have you been working in your current organization?

Less than 1 year____ 2-5 years 6-10 years ___ 11-15 years ____ More than 16

years _____

8) Are you currently a: Teacher ____ Administrator ____ Support Staff ____ Post

Secondary Educator ____

139

APPENDIX C:

JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY

Directions: Below are a number of statements related to employee job satisfaction.

The responses ranging from (1) disagree very much to (6) very much agree. Please

indicate the degree of agreement or disagreement with each statement.

1. I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do.

2. There really is too little chance for promotion on my job.

3. My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her job.

4. I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive.

5. When I do a good job, I receive the recognition for it that I should receive.

6. Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good job difficult.

7. I like the people I work with.

8. I sometimes feel my job is meaningless.

9. Communications seem good within the organization.

10. Raises are too few and far between.

11. Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance of being promoted.

12. My supervisor I s unfair to me.

13. The benefits we receive are as good as most other organizations offer.

14. I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated.

15. My efforts to do a good job are seldom blocked by red tape.

16. I find I have to work harder at my job because of the incompetence of people I work with.

17. I like doing the things I do at work.

18. The goals of this organization are not clear to me.

19. I feel unappreciated by the organization when I think about what they pay me.

20. People get ahead as fast here as they in other places.

21. My supervisor shows too little interest in the feelings of subordinates.

22. The benefit package we have is equitable.

23. There are few rewards for those who work here.

24. I have too much to do at work.

25. I enjoy my coworkers.

26. I often feel that I do not know what is going on with the organization.

27. I feel a sense of pride in doing my job.

28. I feel satisfied with my chances for salary increases.

29. There are benefits we do not have which we should have.

30. I like my supervisor.

31. I have too much paperwork.

32. I don’t feel my efforts are rewarded the way they should be.

33. I am satisfied with my chances for promotion.

34. There is too much bickering and fighting at work.

35. My job is enjoyable.

36. Work assignments are not fully explained.

140

APPENDIX D:

JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY REPRINTED PERMISSION

Reprinted with electronic permission from Paul Spector December 2008

On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Jennifer Parker Ayers wrote:

Hell Dr. Spector,

I am Jennifer a doctoral candidate at Walden University. I am at the

dissertation phase of my terminal degree. My research study is examining

the role job satisfaction, job involvement, and perceived supervisor support

as predictors of organizational commitment among educators.

The reason for the email is I would like to use the JSS to measure job

satisfaction, but the survey is very lengthy compared to the other three

instruments I am using for the study. My question is, is there a shorter

version with statistical analysis available.

I look forward to your response.

Count it all joy!

Jennifer Parker Ayers, MS,NCC, LPC

-- Count it all joy!

Jennifer Parker Ayers, MS,NCC, LPC

Reply Forward

Paul Spector (PSY)Dear Jennifer: You have my permission to use the JSS in your research. If you...

12/15/08

|Jennifer Parker Ayers to Paul

show details 12/15/08

from Jennifer Parker Ayers <barackstrate[email protected]>

to "Paul Spector (PSY)" <[email protected]sf.edu>

date Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 4:15 PM

subject Re: Short Version of JSS

mailed-bygmail.com

hide details 12/15/08

Thank you so much. I look forward to results of the study.

- Show quoted text -

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Paul Spector (PSY) <[email protected]> wrote:

141

APPENDIX E:

JOB INVOLVEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Job Involvement Questionnaire Reprinted with permission from Greenwood Publishing

Group, May 2009

Directions:

Below are a number of statements each of which you may agree or disagree

with depending on your own personal evaluation of your present job. Please indicate the

degree of your agreement or disagreement with each statement by putting a (X) in one of

the six blanks representing the answer categories: (strongly agree, agree, mildly agree,

disagree, and strongly disagree) that appear against the statement.

1. The most important things that happen to me involve my present job.

2. To me, my job is only a small part of who I am.

3. I am very much involved personally in my job.

4. I live, eat, and breathe my job.

5. Most of my interests are centered around my job.

6. I have very strong ties with my present job which would be very difficult to break.

7. Usually I feel detached from my job.

8. Most of personal goals are job oriented.

9. I consider my job to be very central to my existence.

10. I like to be absorbed in my job most of the time.

142

APPENDIX F:

JOB INVOLVEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE PERMISSION

143

144

APPENDIX G:

SURVEY OF PERCIVED ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT (SPOS)

Directions for SPOS: Listed below are a series of statements that represent possible

feelings that individuals might have about the organization for which they work. Please

indicate the degree of your agreement or disagreement with each statement by checking

one of the seven alternatives below each statement. (0=strongly disagree, 1= moderately

disagree, 2= slightly disagree, 3= neither agree or disagree, 4=slightly agree,

5=moderately agree, and 6= strongly agree)

(R) indicates the item is reverse scored

1. The organization values my contribution to its well-being. (1)

2. The organization fails to appreciate any extra effort from me. (R) (3)

3. The organization would ignore any complaint from me. (R) (7)

4. The organization really cares about my well-being. (9)

5. Even if I did the best job possible, the organization would fail to notice

6. The organization cares about my general satisfaction at work. (21)

7. The organization shows very little concern for me. (R) (23)

8. The organization tries to make my job as interesting as possible. (27)

Reprinted with electronic permission from Robert Eisenberger, December 2008

145

APPENDIX H:

SURVEY OF PERCEIVED ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT (SPOS) REPRINTED

PERMISSION

Original E-mail

> From:

[email protected]

> Date: 12/17/2008 03:56 PM

> To: Jennifer Parker-Ayers

> <

[email protected]

> Subject: Re: Permission to the SPOS Instrument

> Dear Jennifer,

> I am happy to grant permission for you to use the

> SPOS for your interesting dissertation project. I

> wonder if I might receive an electronic copy of your

> dissertation when it is complete.

> Cordially,

> Bob

> Robert Eisenberger

> Professor

> Psychology Department

> University of Delaware

> Newark, DE 19716

[email protected]

> (302) 831-2787

> ---- Original message ----

146

APPENDIX I:

TCM EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT SURVEY

AFFECTIVE, CONTINUANCE, NORMATIVE COMMITMENT SCALE

Directions: The following statements address an employee’s level of affective,

continuance, and normative commitments. Please indicate your degree of agreement or

disagreement with the statements by indicating (1) strongly agree to (7) strongly disagree.

Affective Commitment Scale Items

1. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career in this organization.

2. I enjoy discussing my organization with people outside it.

3. I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own.

4. I think I could easily become as attached to another organization as I am to this

one. (R)

5. I do not feel like “part of the family” at my organization. (R)

6. I do not feel “emotionally attached” to this organization. (R)

7. This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me.

8. I do not feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization. (R)

Continuance Commitment Scale Items

1. I am not afraid of what might happen if I quit my job without having another one

lined up. (R)

2. I would be very hard for me to leave my organization right now, even if I wanted

to.

3. Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my

organization right now.

4. It wouldn’t be too costly for me to leave my organization in the near future. (R)

147

5. Right now, staying with my organization is a matter of necessity as much as

desire.

6. I believe that I have too few options to consider leaving this organization.

7. One of the few negative consequences of leaving this organization is that leaving

would require considerable personal sacrifice; another organization may not

match the overall benefits I have here.

8. If I had not already put so much of myself into this organization, I might consider

working elsewhere.

Normative Commitment Scale Items

1. I think that people these days move from company to company too often.

2. I do not believe that a person must always be loyal to his or her organization. (R)

3. Jumping from organization to organization does not seem at all unethical to me.

(R)

4. One of the major reasons I continue to work for this organization is that I believe

that loyalty is important and therefore feel a sense of moral obligation to remain.

5. If I got another offer for a better job elsewhere, I would not feel it was right to

leave my organization.

6. I was taught to believe in the value of remaining loyal to one organization.

7. Things were better in the days when people stayed with one organization for most

of their careers.

8. I do not think that wanting to be a “company man” or “company woman” is

sensible anymore. (R)

Reprinted with permission from World Discoveries Publishing March 2009

148

APPENDIX J:

TCM EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT SURVEY PERMISSION

Subject: PayPal money request from WORLDiscoveries™

Note:

Dear Jennifer Parker Ayers, In response to your request to purchase TCM

EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT SURVEY LICENSE AGREEMENT – FOR

STUDENT USE, and your agreement to the license terms through Flintbox

on 31 March 2009 12:10 PST, here is a request for payment in the amount of

$31.50 Canadian. -Heather Dimson

This email confirms that you sent a payment for $31.50 CAD to

ecomm@worldiscoveries.ca

149

CURRICULUM VITAE

Jennifer Parker Ayers, MS, LPC, NCC

[email protected]

PROFESSIONAL PROFILE

Jennifer Parker Ayers has over 12 years of professional experience ranging from the

counseling, education, nursing, vocational, management, motivational speaking, and

rehabilitative service fields. Mrs. Parker Ayers is a dedicated practitioner, with a passion

for diversity and change facilitation, participation in supportive services, and health

promotion. Her passions specifically include: educating clients, students, and the

community at large in strategies for good emotional and physical health, and disease

prevention. She is also an innovative workshop and seminar presenter, with an energetic

spirit and devotion to education and the practice of counseling. Mrs. Jennifer Ayers is

currently pursuing a Doctorate of Philosophy degree in Psychology, at Walden

University, Minneapolis, Minnesota. She anticipates completing her terminal degree

requirements in May of 2009.

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

2001 Master of Science Degree in Counseling Psychology, Alabama A&M University,

Normal, Alabama

1998 Bachelor of Science Degree

in Nursing, University of Alabama at Huntsville,

Huntsville, Alabama

LICENSE AND CREDENTIALS

Licensed Professional Counselor

(LPC) Alabama Board of Examiners in Counseling,

Birmingham, Alabama

National Certified Counselor (NCC) National Board of Certified Counselors,

Greensboro, North Carolina

Adult and Child CPR Certification

American Red Cross, Huntsville, Alabama

Certified Change Works Practitioner (CCP)

MasterStream Training, Charlotte, North Carolina

150

OTHER PROFESSIONAL TRAINING

• General Education Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Workshop- 2009

• Technology and Webcasting Approaches to Student Learning; Summer 2009

• Assessment Workshop II: The “FAMOUS” Approach- June 2009

• Assessment Workshop I: Student Learning Outcomes in Higher Education

• MasterStream Changes Works Seminar and Certification-2008

• Seven Habits of Highly Effective People Workshop Completion-2006

• Access 2002 Level Certification, New Horizons Computer Learning Center

• Drug Task Force Intervention Strategies Course, Huntsville City Police

Department-2003

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

2009- Present:

MEI-SAMSHAHIV/AIDS Grant University Liaison

Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University, Normal, Alabama

Summer 2009: Institutional Research and Planning Assessment Associate

Alabama A&M University, Normal, Alabama

2008- Present

: Licensed Professional Counselor (LPC)

Barack Behavioral Health Strategies, Madison, Alabama

Provide individual, group and family counseling, and psychological assessments to a

diverse clientele.

2008-Present

: Behavioral Military & Family Life Consultant (CYB-MFLC)

United States Government Department of Defense Contractor

Provide crisis intervention, mental health, coping and adaptation skills to

children, youth, and families of active duty military personnel stateside and abroad.

2008-Present:

Appointed School of Education Curriculum and NCATE II

Committee Member

Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University, Normal, Alabama

Assist in the design, review, revisions, and implementation of changes to the School

Education curriculum including the Communicative Science, Psychology &

Counseling, and Teachers Education programs, to meet NCATE accreditation

standards.

2006- Present

: Academic Instructor

Alabama A&M University, Normal, Alabama

Instruct students on the post-secondary level on course related to Education,

151

Psychology, Counseling, and other helping professions; advise students as necessary.

2005-2006: Interim Middle School Counselor

Decatur City Schools, Decatur, Alabama

Provided testing, enrollment and withdrawal services, progress reports, in-class

counseling, group counseling, individual counseling, and presented a variety of

workshops relevant to students on the elementary and middle school levels.

2004 -2005

: Adult Education Instructor

Calhoun Community College, Decatur, Alabama.

Provided testing, tutoring, and counseling to students pursuing their GED. Subjects of

mastery: Mathematics, English/Language Arts, Writing, Science, Social Studies, and

Reading.

2002 – 2005

: Launch Program Counselor

Madison County Launch Program, Huntsville, Alabama

Provided daily individual counseling sessions, bi-weekly group counseling sessions,

sought out and enlisted adult mentors for program participants, functioned as the

community service liaison, provided job coaching, administered career,

psychological, and academic assessments.

2000 – 2002:

Upward Bound Summer Component Instructor

University of Alabama at Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama

Instructed students in the following courses: Sociology, Communication 101,

Psychology, Role Playing, Career Exploration, and Multi-Cultural Studies; facilitated

resources and information for careers in the Human Services fields.

1999 – 2002

: Upward Bound (UB) and UB Math & Science Program Counselor,

North Alabama Center for Educational Excellence Huntsville, Alabama

Conducted group and individual counseling, coordinated the counseling curriculum,

administered career and psychological assessments including the Myers-Briggs Type

Indicator, TABE, and the Self Directed Search survey.

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS

• Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology

• Madison City Chamber of Commerce Business Member

• American Counseling Association

• Madison County Mental Health Association Board Member

• Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc.

• American Psychological Association

• Madison County Youth Services Council Member

• National Board of Certified Counselor

152

• American Association of University Professors

MAJOR RESEARCH IN PROGRESS

Mrs. Parker Ayers is currently a doctorate of philosophy candidate at Walden University.

She is in the dissertation phase of completing her terminal degree. Her research question

will address whether or not job satisfaction, job involvement and perceived

organizational support are predictors of organizational commitment.

TEACHING EXPERIENCE AND TOPICS OF INTEREST

• Image Projection Helping Skills

• Change Strategist Abnormal Psychology

• Group Dynamics General Psychology

• Human Relations Educational Psychology

• Psychology of Adjustment Industrial Psychology

• Human Growth and Development

• Career Exploration and Counseling

• The Effects of War on Individuals and Family Dynamics

• Adaptation to Biracial Families

• Community Health (Children and Women)

• Organizational Change

COMMUNITY SERVICE ACTIVITIES

• 2007-present

Head coordinator for the Cradle Roll Department, Fist Seventh-day

Adventist Church

• 2007-present

Mental Health Association Board Member

• 2008-present

Alabama A&M Changing Lanes Mentor

• 2007-present

Alabama A&M University Psychology Department Student

Advisory Board Chairperson and Undergraduate Student Advisor

• 2004-2005 Coordinator of the National Youth Volunteer Day at the Huntsville

Employment Center

• 2005

-2005 Presenter in the National Mental Health Day

• 2004-2005

North Alabama Coordinator for National Alcohol Screening Day

153

• 2003-2005 North Alabama Coordinator for National Alcohol Screening Day

• 2003-2005 World AIDS Day testing facilitator

• 2002-2005 Director of Lady Allure Mentoring Program

• 2002-present AGAPE Respite Care parent

• 1996-1998 CASA Rebuilding Houses for the Community Volunteer

• 1996-present American Red Cross Disaster Relief Volunteer

PROFESSIONAL PRESENTATIONS

• Presented various workshops on AIDS/HIV and STD prevention

• Presented a seminar on “Professionalism

” to adults returning to the workforce

after several years of unemployment

• Presented a workshop on “Orienteering”

an experiential learning process that

helps individuals adapt and learn from their environment

• Presented various workshops on the importance of “Constructive Criticism

” and

“Effective Communication” Seminars

• Presented a workshop on current academic and psychological testing resources

available to an audience of educational personal at the elementary, secondary, and

post secondary levels

• Presented a workshop on “What the Industry Looks Like for an Employee

”

• Presented a seminar entitled “Business 101

” an interactive seminar to help

individuals acclimate themselves to the workplace of the 21

Century

• Presented numerous workshops to youth and older adults on “The Importance of a

Positive Attitude”

• Presented numerous workshops on “The Importance of Psychology in the

Workplace”

• Presented a Career Counseling workshop on “Why Counseling”

• Presented a workshop on “The Role of Motivation in the Educational Process”

154

PROFESSIONAL PROJECTS

• Project year 2009-present: Recent Appointment as Project Director for the MEI-

SAMSHA Initiative at Alabama A&M University

• Project year 2007-current:

Currently conducting research to evaluate students

who have graduated from the Alabama A&M University psychology department

within the past five years to evaluate: success rates with job retention, education

satisfaction, and the level of job preparedness in their chosen profession based on

the degree earned at Alabama A&M University.

• Project year 2002: Assisted in the development of the counseling component for

the Launch Program when it was established in 2002

• Project year 2002: Collaboratively created and implemented the Launch Program

clinical assessment tools, counseling forms (6) for documentation, and designed

the counseling curriculum

• Project year 2001: Developed and implemented the counseling curriculum for

the North Alabama Center for Educational Excellence

• Project year 1999: Designed, introduced, and implemented the Testing Services

Curriculum Program for the North Alabama Center for Educational Excellence

• Project year 1999: Created the Upward Bound and Upward Bound Math &

Science counseling curriculum forms and surveys for the North Alabama Center

for Educational Excellence