1.3.5.... - r [‘1 ....... {.7 A.!.H.d.h-.v..\l..v..§.u. u. . w--.u.h..fl.3613-..1§78.§1 ... .IL..- {Dub-.41.”! “Hui cIV . .16.. . fink-51.11.. ,nnH...n.:\Il ..- . .. . . . U . .. L... .3! - 11...LHL.......1 2.1 0.11.... Ilwu.lv . .i...v:. :.l-... n. 1.! flinflzihm .. .. w! .. - .1 . .n It .14'PIIH-INI.\O|’9 0|! I.I~\O o t 1 Ant... .....¢(.).D.....: -. 5. . I.-. t... -. ., "’ u u ‘9 V Ila: F. a. '5‘ o O ‘. in” "'l'. L g. Q I.. 0... DO 04. .II v5.01“ . . n. . Remain... 2.. :5: 3.. - . 1. 0.. . til...‘ "at. ‘0 C40. . I... I I. .n. .Io‘. v 0H! .a z. .mm 3...: it 1- x. . - ..- . .. t .3 ,. :1 .. I. . .K.ur......... 1.“! D... . ... i . ul‘ ll - ,3 Vt ‘I- {Idiiinun .l . o n.0‘.o . I 1 I‘ ‘3 1" "flgl'E ‘ 1' ‘uu‘CHO'J. l’.‘ ' I. . z... . . .. I .....-|-.fl. 5.2.5.». and"... “83....-- “$1551... 11......u1 . - . .. 3 go... .5»... 3... 7 A... {can 1......“ l L... \ v... ~n $4 “‘1‘! 01%... .11]! At I. I‘ll- lect '00 .1 3-.- . . I. X...) n. 27...- ... (8.... ...\Ll:....l¢.tl-.2~u!: . v. Q 7 . (in \v . 1!.“ v u u .0 .1. c... 31v - 7 v . '1 I .Av. o .. I4 ‘0 t‘ . vi .1... 00...”: . . n 1. .. y. 1.! : I'VE-1' . i 1.... u I. a- In“!- .«l. II V.‘ ‘1 iv. . . .. .........1........v.u.l... . h... hangar...“ . 1 “rink . , 1.....- .. - .Lll‘bnr .. finnahfiww 8.4m-..-..5.l . ‘1 i}... 1.... u .1. i: -2. $3.13!. a. {LBJWW \«9 til: . n 3... . ii... 1.2.. . (.12... z . 1...! .u ixflé. - I A o" . cl . .5 o . vv. . . 01.-.. . oi...”- vlult v..- .I. . .-. . {Owl .v. Linnhlfwilvo . hulk...» howls ‘.). .. .. I|I . ‘1‘- if] '1‘... . . not)! “.IIU. . Vlbl‘QWdULHMRt At. Ill-(u. .. 0V ‘1‘ 01V 5 D. O‘ \ I.“i14-‘ ‘Int . .u. nfitohl‘QIJ .|.- . in, v.0 1 . a“ ‘ ‘ lO‘Ki KVl' A“ I .1. - CI. .‘ >|I-|- I. t A . v H; .u..- . . I H. . N. .. .HIIII‘. .1... {.4 vollzflflnahflfilu . 0 . ..Hn'\lnv.¢‘.$h |l VII-.11..- II.-§ \u.a\¢0\ I. ... . . .1. .- . -. .. . - n . .1»... . h... . - 1.. .a v . u . Z . 1 I t v '1 u. u 0... v\ 7.5. tv t V . 9 I O ocuvAQ a... v. v '- l I . . . .I : | . .Iil‘ Vill‘u - v1.1 . .. n - \ .. .3. . um. i鑧.$: |6Y\|. nun? itv 17. D 1|“... |.III|III- II I .11.“.IOHNIIOIPIIO‘I 0. . .0 .. ..u u 1‘....tr.|\.rl\o‘ollwb .Iviinl‘tvbl. I v YOU. I Jz: . ’ 3ng 613%,? :i!’ ‘ 5 5 u “ o . ‘ 5"” . , t‘: '9. 5.. .' 1.... ‘g‘nl-é ?. 'J; 7151 i .. . .V‘.II.I:“. £.D\|l“hl\‘ . I». \l .4 9.1.. ‘11... $00.} . .o‘vhsiTr. {.It‘t.“ .1 [via .QE‘I‘OIDNSV‘I . v ii... .1. 1...! EL 1- Eh“ i.-..d.0.l.t.¢~\4 . .1. u. .- .1 ‘JiintfivVfluHI \901..||1ni\uvdvcflfific|0 M...v|.\o.v..lalc0|.\u.|0\lhluinl‘n .4. u... |v.oHl.vaSI.‘I.9| . a c Iii-v ix11utl‘ll‘6‘bfiulhl‘hlil J...- v‘ rt}. V..- I) . .I‘lhohU.‘|oo .1 xi .ll‘tltv ‘l‘htfli -vluli. 1.5th10... fil:€llfl.§. .11. ...1\. .1. :1 I I. l1...l.‘1|.t.-1..t : ii- 2" .fi I I 1 I. Tl.-. {111)}..1 ét‘liit o. \i11‘ult‘ 3t [1 I. . ‘3 J': n 1 c .. \“h'ttluOEl lufi‘tl‘lc ~ I\.I|'II.LO.O\OI”\| 0|. illlukillv.‘.9...novfl.h . it... Bile. 3.11. ‘0: - “anvi- 1.1.1.?! ‘ .n‘ L I! . .‘fi L. “1.7.“. rut-HAHN“ -.l.ll. i - 1......u .nwflnmn 3 . V ' f! "o II~III.I“ m3 1‘ .. . . a. u 1...! . . - - : y .1 14. 4. - . - si...nt.!:. .Hnuuhwt... xfiEuLLumNuw:da. i... L... . . 1.... {.0951 (I... HRH. u. . .. 12......1 .. i' D :hwl 1 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled Conflict and Organizational Commitment presented by Arnon Elaine Reichers has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for PLD, degreein W Administration l (J Major professor /— Date lelirua#_ l0 ‘ l‘g; “(III-n. Afr v‘m ‘ ' I" In I, , . l 0.1 1 MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LIBRARIES remove this checkout from _.!..£3555.. your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date ; stamped-below.'”“”*~ l we“ — — " - z m W4.“ ... _ FEBl 7l9‘lc «M K M5 (MB llgielig KN”; Him MWW 373 gm: lM‘ 1:3,}? .. ‘1? K )0? WM AUG Mia—.— weft—4‘ a If M) 61;, l' 1 1999 / r W» Flo! CONFLICT AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT By Arnon Elaine Reichers A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Management 1983 © Copyright by ARNON ELAINE REICHERS 1983 ABSTRACT CONFLICT AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT By Arnon Elaine Reichers Intra-psychic conflicts and psycho-social conflicts were explored as correlates of organizational commitment among professional employees of a mental health services organization. Intra-psychic con- flict was defined as the inability to choose decisively in favor of any one of four organizational constituencies (top management, funding agencies, clients, professionalism). Psycho-social conflict was defined as the discrepancy between individual orientations towards these constituencies and perceptions of top managements' orientations towards these groups. The relationship between tenure in the organiza- tion and commitment was also investigated because of the importance of tenure as a correlate of commitment in previous research. Results indicate that only psycho-social conflict was significantly related to organizational commitment among professionals in this organization. Implications for theory and practice are discussed along with direc- tions for future research. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS For all my parents (intellectual, biological, and adoptive). And for all my friends and colleagues who cheered, cajoled, pushed, pleaded, and stood by me. But especially for Elaine, whose help and support was immeasur- able, and for John, who was a source of inspiration to me in more ways than one. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................... ii LIST OF TABLES ........................... iv LIST OF FIGURES .......................... v INTRODUCTION ............................ 1 CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW ................. 5 Organizational Commitment ............. 7 Organizations as Coalitional Entities ....... l9 Conflict ...................... 25 CHAPTER Two: METHODOLOGY .................... 42 Research Site ................... 42 Sample ....................... 43 Survey Instruments ................. 43 Analyses ...................... 60 CHAPTER THREE: RESULTS ...................... 6l Properties of the OCQ ............... 6l Properties of the CEM ............... 65 Tests of Hypotheses ................ 73 CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS ..... 80 Discussion ..................... 80 Implications .................... 89 Conclusions .................... 94 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................ 95 iii Table 10 ll 12 l3 I4 15 16 LIST OF TABLES Summary of Combination Approaches to Organizational Commitment as a Dependent Variable ........... Interview Questions Concerning Individual and Organizational Effectiveness ........ - ...... Constituency Endorsement Measure ............ Response Check Item. .................. Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) (Mowday, Steers, and Porter, l979) ........... Descriptive Statistics for the OCQ (Mowday, Steers, and Porter, l979) ........... Predictive Validities for the OCQ (Mowday, Steers, and Porter, 1979) ........... Tenure Item ....................... Intercorrelations of Commitment with Other Variables . . . Intercorrelations among Conflict Measures ........ Intercorrelations among Specific Types of Conflict . . Intercorrelations among Conflict Measures and Measures of Organizational Attachment .............. Constituency Endorsement Scores as Correlates of Commitment ....................... Descriptive Statistics of Major Variables ........ Intercorrelations among Predictors and Criterion Variable ........................ Summary of Hierarchical Multiple Regression ....... iv Page 18 46 47 53 55 56 58 59 62 67 69 7O 72 73 74 75 LIST OF FIGURES Figures Page 1 Example of Constituency Endorsement Profile ....... 51 2 Average Constituency Endorsement Profile ......... 7l 3 Antecedents of Organizational Commitments ........ 93 INTRODUCTION This research explores the relationship between conflict and organizational commitment using a theoretical perspective derived from both personality theory (Maddi, 1980) and macro conceptions of organi- zations as political entities (Pennings and Goodman, 1979). This per- spective is based upon the premise that commitment is in large part a process of identification with organizational goals and values, but that organizations frequently espouse several different sets of goals and values. The conflict that is engendered in some individuals when they must choose between two or more mutually exclusive goal orienta- tions is hypothesized to be associated with lower levels of commitment to the organization as a whole. In addition, to the extent that indi- viduals do identify with multiple sets of goals and values, they are presumed to experience multiple commitments. Thus, it is suggested here that the concept of organizational commitment may require refine- ment and further specification to reflect the multi-dimensional nature of commitment. The rest of this introduction provides an overview of the theories, reasoning, and assumptions that guided this research. A com- plete explanation of what is presented in this introduction appears as Chapter One. An extensive review of the literature that deals with commit- ment as a dependent variable revealed that psychological processes, 2 particularly identification, have been theoretically and empirically important as antecedents or correlates of organizational commitment. In addition, this review of the literature indicated that commitment has almost always been defined and measured as a unidimensional construct--unidimensional in the sense that the organization is con- ceived of as a monolithic structure which serves as the sole overarch- ing focus for commitment. This view of organizations and this con- ceptualization of commitment is surprising in light of various macro approaches to organization that stress the multi-faceted, coalitional nature of organizations. Accordingly, a body of organizational literature was reviewed that indicated that some organizational theorists view organizations as coalitional entities, comprised of different groups which espouse competing goals for the organization. In particular, an approach by Pennings and Goodman (1979) which describes organizations in terms of their internal and external constituencies was adopted. Briefly, this theoretical perspective maintains that organizational effectiveness is a function of the degree to which an organization succeeds in satisfy- ing the sometimes competing goals and values of groups of individuals that have a vested interest in organizational functioning. Examples of organizational constituencies include groups such as customers or clients, employees, the public at large, and top managers. A parallel was drawn between this coalitional conceptualization of organizations and Gouldner's (1958) work on identification and reference groups. It was argued that the relationship between indi- viduals and reference groups is analogous to that which exists between organizations and constituencies. That is, different individuals tend 3 to judge their personal effectiveness with respect to the goals and values of the reference groups with whom they identify. Organizations are judged effective, in a similar sense, to the extent that they satisfy the demands or goals of multiple, competing constituencies. Empirical work on reference group theory, professionals, and boundary role persons was cited to bolster this parallel and to show that cer- tain types of employees are likely to be aware of the conflicting expectations to which they are subjected. In addition, the results of interviews conducted with the respondents of the sample used here sug- gested that many individuals (particularly professionals) experienced conflict regarding their endorsements of the goal orientations of mul- tiple constituencies. Conflict was considered to be important in understanding organizational commitment in two ways. First, it was reasoned that intra-psychic conflict, or within-person conflict regarding the legiti- macy of the goals of various constituencies, may manifest itself as the individual's inability to identify with or commit to any single entity, including the organization as a whole. This may occur when the energy that is expended by an individual in dealing with intra-psychic con- flict is not available to be expended elsewhere, as in commitments to various sets of goals and values. Second, it was argued that psycho- social conflict, or conflict between the individual and a group, may make identification with that particular group (and thus commitment to that group's goals) impossible. Thus, it was reasoned that igtgae psychic conflicts of sufficient magnitude may result in withdrawal from the organization, a withdrawal which would be indicated by low levels of commitment. And, psycho-social conflict, between the individual and 4 top management in this case, could prevent the individual from identi- fying with top management's goals and values. This lack of identifi- cation with top management's goals might also be associated with low levels of commitment to the total organization. This hypothesized relationship was based upon the reasoning that one focus or facet of organizational commitment may be commitment to managerial goal orienta- tions. Therefore, factors such as psycho-social conflict, which inhibit identification between individuals and top management, may also inhibit identification with and commitment to the organization. The impetus for the importance of conflicts as correlates of ‘ commitment was obtained from Maddi's (l980) review of personality theories. In his view, many theories of personality attempt to explain personality dynamics and development as a function of intra-psychic or psycho-social conflicts. This classificatory scheme for conflict types was applied to the study of commitment because it seemed both general enough and specific enough to capture the impediments to iden- tification which may be negatively related to commitments. Multiple identifications with various individuals and groups are themselves aspects of personality, so conflict types derived from personality theory seemed particularly appropriate in the study of commitment as an identification phenomenon. Chapter One presents in some detail the empirical and theoreti- cal literature relevant to the present study on the relationship be- tween conflicts and commitments. Chapters Two and Three deal with the data collection procedures and results of data analyses, respectively. Chapter Four discusses these results in light of specific hypotheses, draws some conclusions, and suggests additional research. CHAPTER ONE LITERATURE REVIEW Organizational commitment has been studied primarily from two different perspectives: (l) as an independent variable which deter- mines other outcomes such as attendance, performance, and tenure (Farrell and Rusbult, 1981; Marsh and Mannari, 1977; Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian, 1974; Steers, 1977; Van Maanen, 1975), or (2) as a dependent variable which is thought to be determined by structural/ situational characteristics of organizations (Becker, 1966; Grusky, 1966; Sheldon, 1971), psychological/personal characteristics of indi- viduals (Brown, 1969; Hall, Schneider, and Nygren, 1970), and/or behav- iors that result in individuals attributing an attitude of commitment to themselves (Kiesler and Sakumura, 1966; Salancik, 1977; Staw and Fox, 1977). Commitment as an independent variable is considered an important tapic of research because of its presumed effects on other personally and organizationally relevant outcomes. (The study of commit- ment as a dependent variable is equally important because research that takes this orientation attempts to account for the causes or antecedents of organizational commitment. An understanding of the antecedents of commitment, then, allows for the possibility that organizational prac- tices can influence the level of commitment that is experienced by organization members. 6 Definitions of the concept of commitment vary. Commitment has been defined as: the willingness to exert high levels of effort on behalf of organizational goals; a strong desire to stay with the organi- zation; an unwillingness to leave the organization for increments in pay, status, or professional freedom; a positive evaluation of the organization; the adoption of organizational goals and values as one's own; a feeling of affection for the organization; and as combinations of these elements (Buchanan, 1977). Operational measures of these definitions also vary, with many researchers using short, a priori scales (Brown, 1969; Buchanan, 1974; Grusky, 1966; Hall et al., 1970; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972; Sheldon, 1971). Perhaps the most popular measure of commitment, and one which possesses good psychometric properties is the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) developed by Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian (1974). This scale measures an individual's acceptance of and belief in organizational values and goals, a willingness to exert high levels of effort on behalf of the organization, and a definite desire to main- tain organizational membership. Mowday, Steers, and Porter (1979) report that this scale measures a single, common underlying construct. This research focuses on commitment as a dependent variable. What follows is a brief review of the literature on organizational com- mitment as an independent variable; a more extensive review of the literature on commitment as a dependent variable; a discussion of organizations as pluralistic, coalitional entities; and an overview of the role that conflict plays in commitment. The specific hypotheses of this study are then presented. 7 Organizational Commitment The literature on organizational commitment can be roughly divided into two main categories, one of which deals with commitment as an independent variable leading to such outcomes as performance, atten- dance, and tenure. The second category includes those approaches to the study of commitment that have emphasized its antecedents, that is, where commitment is the dependent variable of interest. Because only a few researchers have treated commitment as a mediating variable, these articles will be grouped in both categories where appropriate. Commitment as an Independent Variable Studies which treat commitment as an independent variable have tended to focus either on the relationship between commitment and with- drawal behaviors or on the commitment/performance relationship. Steers (1977), for example, reported that for a sample of scientists and engineers, commitment is positively and significantly related to desire and intent to remain with the organization and to attendance. He also found that commitment is negatively related to turnover among hospital employees. In a similar vein, Porter et a1. (1974) reported that com- mitment has more of a discriminating influence on a person's decision to stay or leave than does job satisfaction. Porter, Crampon, and Smith (1976) found a significant difference in commitment levels between "stayers" and "leavers" for a sample of managerial trainees. However, Marsh and Mannari (1977) found that commitment had no effect on turn- over for a large sample of Japanese employees of an electrical plant. Their measure of commitment assessed an employee's adherence to the norms and values of lifetime commitment to a particular organization. 8 Because this latter study reflects a uniquely Japanese orientation to commitment, it may not be comparable to the work done on the commitment/ turnover relationship in this country. With respect to the commitment/performance relationship, the results of the few studies that address this issue are inconclusive. Van Maanen (1975) found that commitment is associated with the perfor- mance of rookie police officers after two months on the job. In a review of organizational literature, Evan (1977) concluded that commit- ment is related to overall organizational effectiveness. On the other hand, Steers (1977) found no significant relationship between commit- ment and individual performance for a sample of hospital workers, scientists and engineers. Despite the equivocal results of research that attempts to relate commitment to behaviors such as turnover, attendance, and per- formance, the idea that commitment §fl2219.22 a determining factor in these outcomes is an appealing one. When commitment is conceptualized in motivational terms, that is, as an acceptance of organizational goals Egg as a willingness to exert high levels of effort on behalf of organizational goals, one would expect a positive relationship between commitment and performance. However, factors other than motivation, such as ability and role clarity are necessary prerequisites to effec- tive performance. A lack of ability or conflicting role expectations could reduce even a highly motivated individual to a less than effec- tive performer. The fact that commitment has been positively associ- ated with performance in some studies, is, perhaps, indicative of its importance as a motivational component of behavior, since willingness to exert effort on behalf of organizational goals is probably 9 synonymous, in many cases, with the actual exertion of that effort. Yet, motivation or commitment is a necessary, but not sufficient condi- tion for performance, and Steers did not assess other antecedents of performance such as ability and role clarity in his study. Until researchers can agree on a more coherent and precise conceptualization of organizational commitment, and until researchers assess commitment as only one factor in performance, it is perhaps unrealistic to expect consistent, strong relationships between commitment and behavioral outcomes. The articles discussed in the next section deal with the nature of the construct itself and its antecedents. Commitment as a Dependent Variable There have been three, not always distinct, streams of research on organizational commitment as a dependent variable. These approaches are termed here either structural/situational, psychological/personal, or behavioral in orientation. A few studies have combined two or more of these approaches in an attempt to account for differing levels of commitment. Structural Approaches Structural approaches to commitment generally apply Becker's (1966) concept of side bets as a determinant of commitment or focus on organizational practices and procedures that induce loyalty in employees. Side bets refer to people's decisions with regard to one aspect of their life (e.g., working for a particular organization) that have consequences for other interests and activities not directly related to that decision. 50, for example, people may be unwilling to change organizations because they do not want to be perceived as job 10 hoppers. In this case, people make side bets by staking their reputa- tion for stability on the decision to remain with a particular organi- zation. Sometimes, according to Becker, organizations make side bets jgr_employees through practices that lock them into post hoc commit- ments. Non-portable pensions, organization-specific perquisites, status, and other benefits are all examples of side bets that result from the organization's policies and which may lead to commitment on the part of employees. Tests of structural approaches to commitment have generally yielded encouraging results. For example, Sheldon (1971) showed that investments such as age, length of service, and position in an organi- zation were significantly related to commitment among research scien- tists. Similar results were reported by Alutto, Hrebiniak, and Alonso (1973) for a sample of school teachers and nurses. Farrell and Rusbult (1981) found that commitment wasa function of rewards, costs, job alter- natives, and investments for a sample of college students and industrial workers. Collectively, these variables accounted for fifty-one percent of the variance in commitment. Thus, while it appears that investments and side bets are significant contributors to commitment, about half of the variance in conmitment levels remains unexplained by this approach. Psychological/Personal Approaches Psychological approaches to the study of commitment have tended to focus on the process of identification with the organization's goals and values. Identification is said to exist when people define them- selves, at least in part, in terms of organizational membership, or when the goals of the individual and the organization are congruent. ll Organizational identification should not be confused with concepts such as job involvement (Rabinowitz and Hall, 1977) or with job attachment (Koch and Steers, 1978). For example, Rabinowitz and Hall report that job involvement concerns both an identification with one's job and the derivation of self-esteem as a result of effective job performance. Koch and Steers characterize job attachment as an attitudinal response to one's job that is reflected in a congruence between one's real and ideal jobs. Research on these constructs has demonstrated their posi- tive association with job satisfaction and their negative relationship to turnover. Both concepts have been shown to be more strongly related to personal factors such as age, education, and adherence to work ethic norms than to situational factors such as job characteristics. Job attachment and job involvement, when it is defined as identification with one's job, are constructs which are similar to organizational commitment, and to each other. All three represent psy- chological linkage variables or are indicators of some form of congru- ence between the individual and the job. However, organizational com- mitment is a variable that has been conceptualized at a higher level of abstraction. It concerns the individual's attachment to or involvement with the organization, rather than the particular job the individual holds. No empirical support for this theoretical distinction among the concepts exists, but researchers have been fairly consistent in making conceptual distinctions, on the basis of level of abstraction. Involve- ment and attachment, then, represent psychological linkages to a 192, while commitment represents a psychological linkage to the organization as a whole. 12 Identification has been conceptualized as a synonym for commit- ment (Becker and Carper, 1956; Kagan, 1958; Schneider, Hall, and Nygren, 1974) and as an antecedent of commitment (Foote, 1951; March and Simon, 1958). For example, Becker and Carper (1956) maintain that commitment to task and commitment to particular organizations are two dimensions of occupational identification among graduate students. Their view of identification is that it is a multi-dimensional construct that includes commitment. In a similar approach, Schneider, Hall, and Nygren (1974) define identification as the adoption of the organiza- tion's goals and values as one's own. This definition of identification is very close to current definitions of commitment which include an acceptance of and belief in organizational goals and values (Mowday et al., 1979). In a somewhat different vein, Foote (1951) defines identifica- tion as the appropriation of a particular identity or series of identi- ties through the introjection of the goals and values of significant others. Significant others include family members and groups (school, church, work, etc.) of which the individual is a member. Through the roles that individuals play, they come to associate their membership in the group with their concept of themselves. Thus, identification with the goals and values of others is the process whereby individuals are linked to groups of which they are members. As the identity forming process proceeds and individuals become more certain of who they are in all their identifications, motivated behavior (conscious, goal-directed behavior) becomes possible. Identi- fication is, therefore, an antecedent condition for the release of energy employed in the pursuit of various goals. To the extent that 13 current definitions of commitment are very motivational in orientation, identification can be seen as an antecedent of commitment. That is, when commitment is defined as a belief in organizational goals and a willingness to exert effort on behalf of organizational goals, then identification with those goals precedes commitment to them. March and Simon (1958) also conceive of identification with group goals as antecedent to an individual's willingness to exert effort on behalf of those goals. These theorists identify five major influ- ences on the strength of an individual's identification with a group, including the extent to which goals are perceived as shared, the amount of competition within the group, the frequency of interaction among members of the group, the perceived prestige of the group and the num- ber of individual needs satisfied in the group. Empirical studies of identification have tended to focus on its antecedents, rather than its outcomes, particularly on the role that need satisfactions play in identification. So for example, Brown (1969) reported that identification with an organization increases as a function of the individual's opportunity to satisfy symbolic motivational states, particularly needs for achievement. In a similar approach, Hall, Schneider, and Nygren (1970) found that identification in the U.S. Forest Service is related to the satisfaction of affiliation and security needs. Lee (1969, 1971) provides empirical support for other aspects of the March and Simon (1958) model, in addition to the importance of need satisfactions. Lee reported that, for a sample of professional scientists, variables associated with organizational and professional l4 prestige, congruence of individual and management goals, and length of service were all significant correlates of organizational identifica- tion. The research on identification as a correlate of commitment draws attention to the idea that commitment is in part an investment of the self in the organization. That is, identification with an organi- zation, implies that one's sense of who one is is derived from organi- zational membership. This psychological link between the individual and the organization is synonomous with commitment when commitment is defined as the adoption of the organization's goals as one's own. When commitment is defined in more motivational terms, as the willing- ness to exert effort in the pursuit of organizational goals, Foote (1951) and March and Simon (1958) have reasoned that identification is a prerequisite to commitment. A lack of longitudinal designs in the empirical work that has been done on identification makes it impossible to determine if identification is an antecedent of commitment or merely an aspect of commitment. However, it seems clear that identification and commitment are related at least in a correlational sense, if not, a causal one. The major reason for this relationship between the two constructs is their conceptual similarity. Identification concerns an internalization of the group's goals and values. Commitment has been defined as an acceptance of the organization's goals and a willingness to work towards them. Thus, current conceptions of commitment tend to include identification as one aspect of commitment. 15 Behavioral Approaches Behavioral approaches to commitment have defined commitment as an attribution that individuals make in order to maintain consistency between behaviors and attitudes. For example, Kiesler and Sakumura (1966) note that commitment involves a binding of the individual to behavioral acts. In a laboratory study, they showed that individuals who were paid very little for performing an act which was consistent with their prior beliefs were more likely to remain uninfluenced by a counter-communication than were individuals who were paid a great deal for performing the same act. They interpret these findings to mean that people attribute an attitude of commitment to themselves when there is no strong, external incentive for engaging in a particular behavior. Salancik (1977) has expanded on the work of Kiesler and Sakumura in defining four characteristics of acts which influence the amount of commitment an individual will feel after having engaged in a particular behavior. Behaviors that are explicit (undeniable), irrevo- cable, volitional, and public have the effect of binding the individual to the behavior and therefore causing greater degrees of commitment. Salancik's approach to commitment is based on the idea that people attribute attitudes like commitment to themselves in order to ration- alize their behavior after the fact. Staw and Fox (1977) reported that escalation of commitment to a course of action, defined as spending additional resources to continue a particular policy, increases when individuals feel personally respon- sible for the initial decision to commit resources. Escalation of commitment tends to decrease over time, but the relationship between 16 escalating levels of commitment and time was not shown to be a stable one. The behavioral approach to commitment discussed above focuses attention on the retrospective, attributional nature of commitment. This approach also draws attention to the importance of behavior, per se, as a determinant of commitment as an attitude. Combination Approaches Combination approaches to the study of organizational commitment have included structural, psychological, and/or behavioral variables in multivariate analyses of commitment. For example, Buchanan (1974) found that situational characteristics of the organization such as first year job challenge and organizational dependability were signifi— cantly correlated with commitment for a sample of 279 managers. In addition, he showed that personal/psychological characteristics such as feelings of personal importance to the organization were predictive of commitment. Similarly, Steers (1977) found that job characteris- tics and work experiences (situational factors), as well as personal/ psychological characteristics such as need for achievement were all significant correlates of organizational commitment. Schneider, Hall, and Nygren (1974) showed that both self-image and job characteristics were correlates of organizational identification among foresters. Their definition of identification is very close to current conceptu- alizations of commitment (Mowday et al., 1979). Table 1 presents a summary of six combination approaches to the study of commitment. The Morris and Sherman (1981) study is the most recent and most relevant to the present research. These researchers 17 selected variables that, based upon a review of the commitment litera- ture, they thought were representative of three important categories of antecedent variables. Thus, the personal chracteristics category was represented by age, level of education, and sense of competence, while role characteristics were represented by leadership style, because these researchers felt that the leader's degree of consideration and initiating structure represented the primary vehicle through which employees assimilate normative information about their work context. Morris and Sherman, as noted in Table 1, reported significant correlations between all three categories of variables and organiza- tional commitment measured with the OCQ. In addition, they reported analyses which indicate that the influence of job level, job focus (direct vs. indirect client care), and organizational context was negligible. These analyses suggest that their results may be generali- zable across jobs, levels, and organizations. Summary On the basis of the foregoing discussion of commitment as a dependent variable, it seems that many factors are related to the level of commitment experienced by individuals in work settings. However, it is difficult to draw any conclusions about the strongest correlates of commitment due to: (1) the variety of measures of commitment used, and (2) the dearth of studies assessing the same structural, personal, and behavioral correlates concurrently. One conclusion that can be drawn is that research designs that employ more than one orientation (i.e., structural, psychological, or behavioral) to the study of commitment as 18 loom u zv mcomtma empnomwc z—qucme -aopm>mc mo mcwcwmgu use apwzmwnsm «Pot .mum .mpzum nwzmcmummp menu on» new mowawpwumm cmstmsm .cowpmozvm .uuwpmcou «Fog .mucmamasoo we mmcmm mumpm owes» mo mmmxopaem pwm— use mwtcoz .m ore; ucmgtzu cw mezzo» .mmcmnu ucmzop muspwuum m>wpwmoa .mmpm2PULonzm mo pm>m~ ppwxm .ucms appo u zv mmwucmmm pews move» ecu um>Po>cw non .cowumnpcmmgo cw mezzo» .umoch>o upon uccm>om Fm cw mgomm>gmnam mnmp .cmxom .mcm>mpm .m xumnemme .mucmpcoasv pwcomgma .zuwpwamvcmqmu —mcowu “pom u zv mcmmcpmcm um~wcmmto .xuwucmuP xmmp .cowpmuaum .comumuwcmmgo ccm .mumwucmwum sucmmmmg on» ugmzoa mmcapwuao asocm .pcmsm>mw;um com vow: .mmonFaEm pmpwamo: sump mcmmum .e Ape, u zv mpmcommmowoca cmcmxz new acmem>po>cw non .mmcmppmcu non .mmmswuopmm .mcacmp moe>tmm amused .m.= asap .Fpm: .cwuwocnum .m cowmmgou cacao coma .cowpmNPcmmco ucmzou mmvzumuuw asocm ucmccau .mmcwppmzo non cmmxuumcwm .msgo: ucmsuwesoo chowumNPcmmco .xuwpwnmucmamu Amnm u zv mmwocmam chowpmnwcmmco .cowpmuwcmmco may ucmzou mmczpwpum newsccm>om can mcvczuume Quota Lamauumgwm .mucmucoasw chomtwa mo mmcwpmme laces ogmwm cw mcmmmcms asap cmcmgoam .N Ammpme cog» uwppwaeoo egos mwpmsmev xwm .mmPUPFoa Amps u zv women: oupap< pmcowumuwcmmco saw: cowaumwmwummmwe .mtzcmu .cowmcma ecu mcmcummu Foozom Nuop ecu xmwcwamc: .F mmumeccoo accomemcm_m mpasmm mung Amvcmsocmmmmm m4m hzwozmamo < m< Hzmthmzzou 4m<£2=m P m4m