MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: P1ace in book drop to remove this checkout from LIBRARIES 1—5— your record. F__INES wiH be charged if book is returned after the date stamped be10w. ~71. 17' ’3‘ “ "5:5 {:7 ' I 0m 2N”""" W0 47 2130 F31“ ANTECEDENTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT IN A UNIONIZED HOSPITAL SETTING BY David Mark Pincus A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Labor and Industrial Relations 1985 @1985 DAVID MARK PINCUS All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT ANTECEDENTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT IN A UNIONIZED HOSPITAL SETTING BY David Mark Pincus This study is a critical analysis of the important correlates and potential antecendents of organizational commitment in a unionized hospital setting. A multifaceted framework was used to investigate the potential influences of three antecedent categories. The following categories were investigated: personal characteristics (i.e. age, tenure, educational level); work related attitudes (i.e. job involvement, perceived functional dependence, perceived decentralization, perceived formalization, union commitment); compensation related attitudes (i.e. perceived wage equity-self referent, perceived wage equity-multiple referent). The multiple correlation and the hierarchical multiple regression results revealed that all three sets of antecedents significantly, but differentially, influenced organizational commitment. The work-related attitudes category provided the greatest amount of unique variance, and was the most significant positive influence on organizational commitment. Within the work-related attitudes category, job involvement, perceived formalization, and perceived decentralization significantly influenced organizational David Mark Pincus commitment, while perceived functional dependence and union/ association commitment did not. The personal characteristics category also contributed a significant increment of unique variance for organizational commitment. Within this category, tenure in the organization was found to be an important extrinsic determinant of organizational commitment. The educational attainment dummy variables, however, did not significantly influence organizational commitment. The results also indicated some support for the potential influence of the compensation related attitudes category on organizational commitment. Neither of the attitudinal measures nested within this category, however, significantly influenced organizational commitment. Finally, the limitations of the study were specified. The practical implications of the findings regarding our understanding of the organizational commitment process were reviewed, as well as directions for future research. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS When I initiated my program at the School of Labor and Industrial Relations, my primary goal was to improve my understanding of labor relations by integrating the institutional and micro aspects of this discipline. Hopefully, this dissertation reinforces the notion that on in depth understanding of labor relations requires an integration of divergent, yet related, points of view. This research could not have been implemented without the full cooperation of the Michigan Nurses Association and the United Steelworkers of America. It should be noted that the opinions expressed in this dissertation are those of the author and in no way reflect those of the Michigan Nurses Association or the United Steelworkers of America. Professional and academic development require strong support, encouragement, and rigorous training. The staff, students, and faculty in the School of Labor and Industrial Relations provided me with opportunities to stretch my intellectual and social capacities. I will always be indebted to Drs. D.H. Kruger and T.H. Patten, two eminent institutional scholars, for thier patience, interests, and instruction. Their mentorship of my graduate school experience greatly enhanced the traditional portion of my ii curriculum. Also, my research and methodological skills were enhanced during the course of several research projects directed by Dr. R.N. Block. The author also wishes to thank the other members of his dissertation advisory committee, Drs. S. Stark, K. Ford for providing guidance and assistance. Friends and colleagues are important ingredients for a wholesome graduate experience. For their moral support, friendship, and assistance I would like to thank T. Wiencke and S. Premack. Words cannot adequately express my admiration for my extended family in Lansing, Michigan, Donald and Carol Power. They have aided me immeasurably, both professionally and personally during my stay at Michigan State University. T. Dennany and L. Gutzki—Garfield did all the typing of the text. Their deligiance, and skill expedited the project, while their personalities made the entire project quite an enjoyable experience. Although the above individuals provided essential contributions to this project and my graduate career, the contributions provided by my family exceed all others. My mother, father, and brother have always provided me with unfaltering support and encouragement. This dissertation is dedicated to their love, confidence, and endless support; it represents a culmination of familial dreams and aspirations. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . General Introduction. . . . . . . . . Research Objectives and Potential Contributions of this Study. . . . Outline of this Study . . . . . . . . CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . Introduction to Traditional Approaches. . . . . The Calculative-Rational Approach . . The Social-Psychological Approach . . The Motivational-Affective Approach . CHAPTER III. THE HEURISTIC MODEL, RELATED AND HYPOTHESES . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . The Heuristic Model . . . . . . . . . The Literature Review and Hypotheses. Personal Characteristics. . . . . . . Work Related Attitudes. . . . . . . . Compensation Related Attitudes. . . . Intent to Remain. . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER IV. METHOD. . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample and Research Site. . . . . . . Data Collection Procedure . . . . . . Operationalization of Variables . . . Personal Characteristics . . . . . Work Related Attitudes . . . . . . Compensation Related Attitudes . . RESEARCH, The Dependent Variable: Organizational comflitment O I O O O I O O O O O The Behavioral Intention Measure: to Remain O O I O O O O O O O 0 Method of Analysis. . . . . . . . . . iv Intent PAGE vi vii 11 ll 12 27 39 52 52 52 55 55 58 74 86 90 90 90 95 96 97 98 101 103 103 104 CHAPTER V. RESULTS. . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . The Correlational Analyses. The Hierarchical Regression CHAPTER VI. DISCUSSION. . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . Limitations . . . . . . . . Discussion. . . . . . . . . Practical Implications. . . Analyses. Directions for Future Research. APPENDIX A: THE QUESTIONNAIRE . APPENDIX B: MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS VARIABLES CONTAINED IN THE HEURISTIC MODEL. LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . FOR 108 108 108 113 120 120 120 126 137 140 145 160 161 LIST OF TABLES PAGE Hypothesized Associations Among the Variables and Organizational Commitment. . . . 88 Descriptive Statistics for the Total Sample and Each of the Bargaining Units . . . . . . . 92 Coefficient Alpha Reliability Estimates. . . . 105 Zero-Order Correlations for Variables Contained in the Heuristic Model . . . . . . . 109 Multiple Correlations Between Antecedent Categories and Organizational Commitment . . . 112 Hierarchical Regression Results of Personal Characteristics (PC), Work Related Attitudes (WR), and Compensation Related Attitudes (CR) on Organizational Commitment. . . . . . . 114 Results of Hierarchical Regression Analyses for Antecedent Variables Nested Within Categories with Significant Unique variance 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 118 vi LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. A Heuristical Model of Organizational Gownitment O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 54 vii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION General Introduction Shrinking product markets, increasing employee alienation, and turbulant organizational environments, are some of the forces which have recently fostered a more enlightened management style. The present preoccupation with quality of worklife and other types of employee involvement strategies seems to evidence a managerial trend toward a human resource form of management, rather than a human relations orientation (Miles, 1965). These participative approaches have one underlying theme: the integration of employee and organizational goals. Moreover, employee participation rather than cooptation is the primary vehicle used to accomplish this desirous outcome. The integration of organizational and individual goals has been much-discussed in the organizational behavior literature (Argyris, 1964: McGregor, 1960: Buchanan, 1974a, 1975; Salancik, 1977a). Argyris (1964) maintained that the following factors needed to be incorporated in any analysis of the integration phenomenon: (1) individual needs, attitudes, values, and feelings; (2) group attractiveness, goals, processes, and norms; (3) organizational activities and policies related to power, penalities, communication, and work flows; and (4) informal activities such as goldbricking, apathy, indifference, interdepartmental conflict, conformity, and mistrust. (Argyris, 1964, pg.12) One of the factors not identified by Argyris but deemed by this author as a crucial determinant of individual and organizational integration is the concept of organizational commitment. Without the existence of some semblance of organizational commitment, the goal of integration may be virtually unachievable (Salancik, 1977a). In addition, to the above mentioned importance of organizational commitment, it has received increased attention in the literature for a number of other reasons. First, organizational commitment has been proposed as a reliable predictor of several pertinent employee behaviors such as turnover (Koch and Steers, 1978) and performance (Mowday, Porter, and Dubin, 1974). Secondly, some researchers have proposed that organizational commitment is more stable attribute than satisfaction because it is conceptually linked with actual employee behaviors (Porter, Crampon, and Smith, 1976; Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian, 1974). Thirdly, the study of commitment provides researchers with an opportunity to investigate the manner in which individuals make sense out of their relationship with their environment (Mowday, Steers, and Porter, 1978). Finally, organizations utilize different motivational inducements to hire, to retain, and to elicit certain prescribed employee role behaviors. Constructive employee-organizational goal integration, however, may require a different motivational impetus. Specifically, for integration to occur a degree of employee innovation, spontaneity, and creativity may be required which exceeds the employee's traditional organizational role boundaries (Katz, 1964). Organizational commitment may be the phenomenon which provides the impetus for the elicitation of these extra-role behaviors by employees. What is commitment? This question is difficult to answer because there have been a number of theoretical approaches used to investigate this concept: the rational-calculative approach (Becker, 1960; Stebbins, 1971), the social psychological approach (Kiesler, 1971, Salancik, 1977a, 1977b: Staw, 1974), and the motivational-affective approach (Steers, 1977: Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian, 1974: Buchanan, 1977a, 1977b, 1975: Morris and Sherman, 1981). Each of thesgwapproaches has defined commitment —.—.___._.—___~_,_~_‘~‘ differently, and thus, there is little consensus concerning the definition of the concept or its measurement (Mowday, Steers, and Porter, 1979). Hrebiniak and Alluto (1972), for example, subscribed to the calculative view of organizational commitment and defined it as an employee's willingness to leave the organization for increments in pay, status, professional freedom, or for greater collegial friendship. Kiesler (1971) and other social psychologists have considered commitment as the pledging or binding of the individual to behavior acts. Finally, Lyman Porter and his colleagues have advocated the motivational-affective approach to the study of commitment (Porter, Crampon, and Smith, 1976: Porter and Smith, 1970; Steers, 1977). They have defined organizational commitment as the willingness of an employee to exert high levels of effort on behalf of the organization, a strong desire to stay with the organization, and an acceptance of its major goals. The above definitions are diverse in terms of their theoretical orientation, and yet, even within orientation there exists a number of alternative views dealing with the definition of the construct. It should be noted, however, that the study of commitment by the motivational scholars does encompass relevant aspects of the other approaches. From a research standpoint, utilizing a multidimensional approach might provide insight regarding the relative influence of a number of different approaches. Although a great deal of research has been conducted on this topic, in the following section of this chapter, additional justification will be provided for undertaking a research project dealing with organizational commitment. Research Objectives and Potential Contributions 2: this Study The major objective of this study is a critical analysis of the importent correlates and potential antecedents of organizational commitment in a unionized hospital setting. Only three studies have undertaken a systematic or comprehensive approach to this tepic (Steers, 1977: Morris and Sherman, 1981: Stevens, Beyers, and Trice, 1978). All three studies used Steers (1977) theoretical framework to guide them in their selection of potential antecedents. One study, however, used a different conceptualization of the organizational commitment dependent variable (Stevens, Beyers, and Trice, 1978) which resulted in dissimilar results. The present study will also employ a version of Steers (1977) multifaceted framework to investigate the potential influences of a variety of antecedents. For replication purposes, the motivational-affective measure of organizational commitment will be employed (Steers, 1977: Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian, 1974) and some of the traditionally hypothesized antecedents will be included in the analysis. Two major theoretical extensions dealing with organizational commitment antecedents will also be evaluated. These antecedents deal with the effects of multiple employee allegiances or attachments (March and Simon, 1958) and perceived compensation equity (Adams, 1965) on organizational commitment. A review of the literature has indicated that these two antecedent categories have never been fully investigated for their potential influence on organizational commitment. The addition of these variables as antecedents of organizational commitment is a significant theoretical contribution and should add to our understanding of this construct. The fractionated scale (Pincus and Reagan, 1982) used to evaluate subjects' perceived compensation equity is also a significant contribution to the labor relations literature. This scale operationalizes critical features of Adam's equity theory (1965) and evaluates the relative saliency of self and multiple referent comparisons. The study is unique for a number of other reasons. First, this author's review of the organizational commitment literature suggests that a pertinent methodological shortcoming may exist in most of the research. While most of the studies (Steers, 1977: Morris and Sherman, 1981; Steven, Beyers, and Trice, 1978) categorize different organizational commitment antecedents in their review of the literature, they do not utilize this theoretical structure when conducting an analysis of the data. Typically, these researchers disregard the categorical framework and investigate the relative contribution of each antecedent variable. By following such a research strategy, no direct evaluation has ever been made of the relative contribution of each category. Cohen and Cohen (1975) support the above analysis by stating that there are two major reasons for organizing independent variables into sets: structural or formal reasons, and reasons which are functional to the substance or logic of the research (Cohen and Cohen, 1975, pg. 123). The present research design falls into the latter category because of the differing theoretical conceptualizations of organizational commitment. Cohen and Cohen's suggested statistical method for handling sets of independent variables, Fisher's protected “t" test, will be discussed in Chapter IV of this study. Secondly, studies of organizational identification and commitment have tended to concentrate on research and developmental personnel (Hall and Schneider, 1972; Rotandi, 1975: Sheldon, 1971; Lee, 1969, 1971; McKelvey, 1969), managerial personnel (Stevens, Beyer, and Trice, 1978; Buchanan, 1974a, 1974b, 1975: Grusky, 1966: Ritzer and Trice, 1969; Porter, Crampon, and Smith, 1976), clergy (Hall and Schneider, 1972; Schoenherr and Greeley, 1974), forest rangers (Hall, Schneider, and Nygren, 1970: Shoemaker, Snizek, and Bryant, 1977). A number of studies have evaluated organizational commitment in health care environments (Alutto, Hrebiniak, and Alonso, 1973; Rusbult and Farrell, 1983; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972; Morris and Sherman, 1981: Steers, 1977; Kidron, 1978). Surprisingly, only two studies investigating the antecedents of identification or commitment have been conducted in a unionized setting (Brown, 1969: Stevens, Beyers, and Trice, 1978). In one study (Stevens, Beyers, and Trice, 1978), skilled and professional-level employees employed by the Tennessee Valley Authority were surveyed to determine whether individuals would identify with an organization where there were competing sources of identification. It may be the case that many of the generalizations discussed by previous researchers may be the result of situation and subject population constraints. The present research study extends the domain of organizational commitment to a relatively unexamined domain-semi- professional employees providing nursing related services in a unionized hospital setting. Outline 2£_This Study The previous portions of this chapter have described, in general terms, the rationale underlying a number of research objectives and the potential contributions of this study. Chapter II deals with a literature review of the traditional theoretical approaches to the study of organizational commitment, their underlying propositions and associated findings. Chapter III describes a heuristic model of organizational commitment and includes a review of the literature as it applies to the independent variables contained in the model. This section also discusses pertinent extensions of the existing theories by justifying the inclusion of dual allegiance and perceptual compensation variables. Specific hypotheses dealing with antecedent categories as well as specific antecedents are also advanced. Chapter IV discusses the method of investigation which includes the subjects for this study, the procedure used to gather the data, the Operationalization of the variables, the reliability of the variables, and the method of data analysis. Chapter V presents the results of the data analysis and is divided into three major parts. First, an examination of the intercorrelation matrix is undertaken to assess the relationship between the variables under investigation. Second, the results of a hierarchical multiple regression by categories will be discussed. Finally, if the F test for any given category is found to be significant, the individual independent variables will be tested for significance. The final chapter in this study, Chapter VI, discusses the results in terms of the previously specified hypotheses 10 and the literature review upon which these hypotheses are based. Moreover, the implications of the findings regarding our understanding of the organizational commitment process will also be included, as well as directions for future research and the limitations of the present investigation. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction 39 Traditional Approaches Three traditional theoretical approaches have been used to study the organizational commitment process: the calculative-rational approach (Becker, 1960: Abramson, Cutler, Kautz, and Mendelson, 1958; Stebbins, 1971), the social psychological approach (Salancik 1977a, 1977b; Staw, 1974), and the motivational-affective approach (Porter, Crampon, and Smith, 1976: Steers, 1977; Buchanan, 1974a, 1974b). Although these approaches do not totally exhaust the ways in which organizational commitment has been conceptualized in the literature, they offer a reasonable cross section of the relevant principles and elements underlying this important construct. Each approach will be discussed in terms of its assumptions as to the nature of the organizational commitment process, the antecedents of organizational commitment, and relevant research results will also be analyzed. 11 12 The Calculative—Rational Approach The theoretical foundations of the calculative-rational approach to organizational commitment can be found in two related fields of sociology: social exchange theory (Homans, 1968; Homans, 1961: Blau, 1964) and reciprocity theory (Gouldner, 1960). Gouldner (1960) defined reciprocity as a mutually contingent pattern of exchanging goods and services or gratification. Gouldner maintained that reciprocity was a generalized moral norm which obligated individuals to one another because obligations were forms of repayments for benefits previously received. Gouldner also hypothesized that reciprocity had two major social functions (Gouldner, 1960, pg. 176). The first dealt with reciprocity's social stabilizing function. More specifically, reciprocity was thought to be an indeterminant moral cement which could be applied to ad hoc transactions which were not necessarily regulated by any codified status obligations. Even in situations where specific status duties or relationships were codified, reciprocity may act as a social stabilizer because it legitimizes specific status I duties and obligations. The second function proposed by Gouldner was that reciprocity was a starting mechanism which helped initiate social interaction. The norm was assumed to have an “unfreezing” characteristic which prevented impasses in 13 fledgling social relationships. The exchange or social relationship was assumed to be facilitated by the internalized obligation one party felt for the other. In other words, the norm instilled some confidence into the relationship where one who had received the initial benefit was obligated to repay it in the near future. Homans asserted that the process of social association involved ". . . an exchange of activity, tangible or intangible, and more or less rewarding or costly, between at least two persons“ (Homans, 1961, pg. 13). The manner in which Homans operationalized exchange is quite similar to Gouldner's definition of reciprocity. An exchange is said to occur when an individual provides rewarding services to another which obligates him. To remove or eliminate this ( obligation, the receiver of these services must furnish some benefit in the form of material or non-material goods to the other individual involved in the transaction (Homans, 1968). Gouldner and Homans, however, differ with respect to the role of reciprocity in any exchange relationship (Blau, 1964). Homans disputed the starting mechanism function of reciprocity although he agreed that the reciprocity norm had a stabilizing function. In contrast to Gouldner, Homans maintained that the starting mechanism for social associations was a direct function of the conditions surrounding the exchange process. Some of the conditions 14 which might affect the social exchange process include the following: the developmental stage of the exchange relationship, the nature of the relationship between the { parties involved in the exchange, the characteristics of the benefit received and the costs incurred, and the social context in which the exchange relationship takes place (Homans, 1961). The social exchange theprists directly contributed to the calculative-rational approach of organizational commitment in their discussion of social exchange, ‘ investments, and commitments (Blau, 1964). Social exchanges / /are purportedly established when one individual makes / ; investments which constitute commitments to the other party I Lin the exchange. Foregone material or non-material alternatives, or reduced alternative opportunities foster a dependency which causes a party in an exchange relationship to become committed. Probably the most influential theorist within the calculative-rational school is Howard Becker (1960). Becker proposed that the concept of commitment was one of a number of mechanisms which could explain the consistency of human behavior. Becker defined commitment as consistent lines of action resulting from earlier personal investments called side bets. He contended that individuals reject plausible / alternatives when they perceive the costs, or forgone 15 investments, of deviations from current behaviors as too high (Steven, Beyer, and Trice, 1978). Becker also proposed the following propositions which must exist for commitment to take place: 1. prior actions of the person staking some originally extraneous interest on his following a consistent line of activity: 2. a recognition by him of the involvement of this] originally extraneous interest in his present activity; and 3. the resulting consistent line of activity (Becker, 1960, page 36). Under this concept commitment is viewed as a structural phenomenon which occurs as a result of individual- organizational transactions and alterations in side bets or investments over time (Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972). The above description implies that commitment is a quasi-rational economic process. Becker also proposed that the side bet mechanism can Operate in a a number of different ways (Becker, 1960, pgs. 36-38). Side bets are often developed as a result of generalized cultural expectations which have certain penalties associated with them. One such cultural expectation may be the notion that individuals should not haphazardly transfer from one job to another. Second, side bets may also evolve from impersonal bureaucratic arrangements. For example, financial side bets unilaterally implemented by an organization in the form of pension funds 16 or stock bonus plans are types of bureaucratic arrangements which may prevent an individual from seeking or accepting alternative employment opportunities. Third, other side bets which constrain behavior deal with the adjustments of individuals to specific social positions. Comfort and familiarity with job responsibilities may freeze employees to such an extent that the individual may become unfit for potential alternative positions. As a result, the individual may become committed to his/her status quo position. Although some of the behaviors discussed above are assumed to result from conscious decisions, Becker also maintained that other types of commitments may arise subconsciously (Becker, 1960). He labeled this commitment by default which: '. . . arises through a series of acts no one of which is crucial but which taken together, constitute for the actor a series of side bets of such magnitude that he finds himself unwilling to lose them" (Becker, 1960, page 38). From an organizational standpoint, employees may become bound to future behavior as an organizational member through the accrual of subconscious psychic investments. The above analysis should indicate that the rational- calculative view of the commitment process is a bit restrictive. Kanter (1968) proposed a more expansive notion of commitment which included three specific types of , commitment. Continuance commitment deals with an 17 individual's commitment to a social role. Cohesion commitment involves commitment to an organization, or any institution, through the development of cathectic orientations toward the institution and its members. Control commitment consists of the forming, by individuals in any social system, of positive evaluative orientations toward institutional norms, values, morals, or demands. This condition results in the individual subordinating his norms, values, and morals for those proposed or demanded by the institution. Kanter's (1968) definition of continuance commitment seems similar to the rational-calculative view of commitment. More specifically, continuance commitment results from a cognitive evaluation by an individual where he/she concludes )xthat the costs associated with leaving the system are greater than the rewards that could be received if the individual remained bound to the system. In other words, potential ‘ profits or rewards compel participation in any social system. Kanter (1968) also proposed two continuance commitment /mechanisms: sacrifice and investments. The process of sacrificing requires an individual to give up something of value in return for membership in the organization. By giving something up, membership has a cost attached which means that it will not be regarded lightly nor given up readily. The process of investment provides the individual 18 with a vested interest in the fate of the organization. When the individual commits his profit to the organization, [separation from the organization becomes costly, and thus, the tendency to leave the organization is much reduced. Investments can be viewed as ingredients in an economic process involving tangible resources such as money. Moreover, investments can also involve certain intangible ) commodities such as time and energy. The definition of commitment by the calculative-rational school and the mechanisms used for its attainment seem to have a certain insidious quality. A quality that seems to connote a semblance of entrapment or forced behavior. Stebbins (1970) distinguished between value commitment and forced or continuance commitment. He stated that forced commitment arose out of subjectively defined penalties associated with the attempt or desire to leave a specific social system. Goffman (1961) made a similar distinction between commitment and attachment. Goffman proposed that the committed individual becomes '. . . locked into a position and coerced into living up to the promises and sacrifices built into it" (Goffman, 1961, pg. 89). The above distinctions suggest that the underlying inducement for involvement in organizations is thought to be [primarily calculative (Etzioni, 1975). Etzioni defined V ‘\ utilitarian organizations as organizations in which the means 19 of motivating and controlling members is largely material I rather than psychological or symbolic. Thus, membership involvement in utilitarian organizations is viewed as /ca1culative, based on a member's determination of the amount of involvement expected to maximize future profit potential (Etzioni, 1975). Such organizations are thought to lack a compelling ideology and tend to be impersonal and rational. These characteristics are thought to foster a segmented perception of self which limit the total commitment of organizational members (Sheldon, 1971). It should be noted that the calculative-rational view also constricts the behavioral outcomes associated with the commitment process. Specifically, for the most part, the only outcome of interest deals with organizational attachment {or intent to remain. Notions of productivity or effective performance is rarely discussed within this framework. Committed workers, however, are thought to have a stake in (the survival of the organization because continued membership cannot be expected without a solvent organization. Becker's side-bet theory of commitment (1960) stimulated a great deal of research. Ritzer and Trice (1969) examined the occupational and organizational commitment of male personnel managers. They operationalized the concept of commitment by asking respondents whether they would leave their present employment for a related job in another field 20 or a job in a related industry if given: (a) no increase, (b) a moderate, or (c) a large increase, in pay, freedom, status, responsibility, and the opportunity to get ahead. Ritzer and Trice rejected the side-bet theory of commitment because few of the variables that Becker would have considered as indicators of side bets correlated significantly with commitment. For example, age, education, marital status, and number of children were not significantly correlated with organizational commitment. Two other correlates of organizational commitment, salary and rate of inter-company I change, were found to be significantly related. Ritzer and Trice offered an alternative conceptualization of organizational commitment which emphasized psychological factors. They proposed that individuals have an inherent need to become committed to something, in order to make working life meaningful. Once this commitment was established via a psychological process, side bets played a role of furthering the commitment process. In other words, they suggested that commitment was a two stage process with an initial psychological component and a secondary reinforcing component performed by Becker's structural phenomenon. Ritzer and Trice's research generated quite a controversy and several attempts were made to replicate their results. Hrebiniak and his associates conducted two studies 21 investigating the structural basis of organizational commitment (Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972; Alutto, Hrebiniak, and Alonso, 1973). The initial study (Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972) investigated the importance of personal and role-related factors in the development of organizational commitment. Elementary and secondary school teachers as well K as registered nurses were used as subjects in this study. \‘The reported results conflicted with those of the Ritzer and Trice study. Organizational commitment was measured with an attitudinal index dealing with perceived utility of continued participation in the employing organization. The results indicated that sex, marital status, father's occupation, role tension, years of experience in the organization, and dissatisfaction with the bases of organizational advancement all significantly contributed to organizational commitment. These findings suggested that commitment is an exchange and accrual phenomenon based on accumulated investments or side bets and an employee's perception of the ratio of inducements to contributions. The second study (Alutto, Hrebiniak, and Alonso, 1973) replicated the Ritzer and Trice study more directly by employing a measure of commitment which was identical to that used by Ritzer and Trice. That is, commitment was measured by summing responses as to whether a subject believed he/she would definitely change, was undecided, or would definitely 22 not change his/her employing organization given a slight increase in pay, or freedom, or status, or friendliness of co-workers. For the most part, the findings supported Becker's side bet theory and were largely contrary to those of Ritzer and Trice. Specifically, they found positive relationships between organizational commitment and age, education, years of experience, and marital status. Moreover, job dissatisfaction and intention to seek an akadvanced degree were negatively related to organizational commitment. Alutto, et a1. (1973) concluded that their results supported Becker's hypothesis and that Ritzer and Trice's findings were spurious due to measurement error. Alutto, et al. (1977) also stated that the contradictory results could also be a function of differences in samples surveyed. Stebbins (1970) criticized the Ritzer and Trice study for inaccurately testing Becker's (1960) side-bet theory. He suggested that they Operationalized their dependent variable in a way which tapped value commitment rather than forced or continuance commitment. Stebbin's suggested that any examination of Becker's theory needed to focus on the subjectively defined penalties associated with the attempt or desire to leave a position or organization. Ritzer and Trice's emphasis on the presence of rewards did not incorporate the forced choice or penalty portions of Becker's 23 definition, and thus, in Stebbins Opinion, resulted in an investigation of value commitment. Other studies have found stronger support for Ritzer and Trice than for Becker. Shoemaker, Snizek, and Bryant (1977) investigated the organizational commitment of park and forest rangers working in state and federal organizations. They reported a positive and highly significant correlation between job satisfaction, and feelings of solidarity and organizational commitment. With respect to support of Becker's side bet theory, correlational results were only partially conclusive. As a consequence, these researchers concluded that Ritzer and Trice's social psychological explanation seemed to be highly plausible. Aranya and Jacobson (1975) examined the theories of both Becker (1960) and Ritzer and Trice (1969) by investigating the organizational commitment of system analysts in Israel. The results supported Ritzer and Trice's theory that organizational commitment was a psychological phenomenon. A Guttman's Smallest Space Analysis was conducted and it indicated that the background variables were distinct and separate from the commitment variables. It should be noted that other studies (Stevens, Beyer and Trice, 1978: Hall and Schneider, 1972: Hall, Schneider and Nygren, 1970: Steers, 1977), have suggested that organizational commitment is a multifaceted phenomenon which 24 can incorporate the findings of both Becker (1960) and Ritzer and Trice (169). These studies have theoretical foundations which differ from the rational-calculative approach and will be reviewed in forthcoming portions of this literature review. Review of the rational-calculative literature, however, has disclosed only one multidimentional study that examined psychological, as well as, exchange antecedents of organizational commitment. Because of the controversy in the literature, Stevens, Beyer, and Trice (1978) defined organizational commitment by using both the Ritzer and Trice (1969) and the Hrebiniak and Alutto (1972) scales. The regression results suggested that there was a similar degree of explanatory power for both measures of organizational commitment. Six role and personal variables (work overload, years in the organization, job involvement, skill level of ’/subordinates, positive attitudes toward change, and years in current position) were found to be significant predictors of organizational commitment. The authors concluded that federal service managers' organizational commitment could not solely be explained by side-bet or psychological approaches: but that both approaches needed to be incorporated into one multifaceted model. More recently, the investment model theorists (Rusbult, 1980; Farrell and Rusbult, 1981: Rusbult and Farrell, 1983) 25 have incorporated certain aspects of the rational-calculative approach into their model of organizational commitment. They (have defined organizational commitment as the likelihood that an employee will retain his position in the organization, and feel psychologically attached to it, regardless of its satisfying characteristics (Rusbult and Farrell, 1983). Organizational commitment is viewed as a multidimensional rphenomenon that will highten with increases in job rewards (high pay, autonomy, variety), decreases in job costs (variation in work load, numerous deadlines, unfair promotion practices), increases in investment size (years of service, nonportable training, nonvested portions of retirement plans), and decreases in alternative job opportunities (Rusbult and Farrell, 1983, pg. 430-431). Support for investment model predictions has been reported in a controlled laboratory experiment and a number of field studies. With respect to the laboratory study, Farrell and Rusbult (1981) reported that significant effects were obtained for current task reward values, current cost task value, alternative value, and investment size. Similar corroborating results were reported in a parallel study of industrial workers. A more definitive test of the model was performed by Rusbult and Farrell (1983) in a sample of semi-professional accountants and nurses. In general, investment model 26 predictions were affirmed as strong commitment was produced !by high job rewards, low costs, poor alternative quality, and large investment size. The longitudinal nature of the study indicated that the impact of job rewards exerted a relatively constant influence, while job costs and investment size exerted an increasingly powerful influence over time. The rational-calculative approach seems to possess two inherent limitations in its attempt to predict ongoing behaviors in organizational settings (Morris and Sherman, 1981). First, the various conceptualizations use measures of commitment which define employee orientations toward organizations on utilitarian bases. Thus, the antecedents measured reflect the instrumental determinants of organizational commitment. Moreover, this has resulted in the use of organizational commitment measures which reflect the likelihood of employee separation from the organization [when inducements in other organizational settings are more or less enticing (Stevens, Beyer, and Trice, 1978: Ritzer and Trice, 1969: Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972: Rusbult and Farrell, 1983). By conceptualizing commitment in this fashion, the dimensionality of the construct is limited in scope and other relevant behaviors are rendered inconsequential. Secondly, the studies discussed above do not empirically evaluate the relationship between commitment and other potential behavioral outcomes. In other words, the rational- 27 calculative approaches view commitment as relatively static rather than a proactive and positive orientation toward the organization. The Social-Psychological Approach The social psychological perspective also discusses the structural antecedents which give rise to commitment, but expands the analysis of the construct in one significant fashion. Specifically, it posits that the process of becoming committed results in one's achieving a new self-sustaining psychological state. Kiesler (1971) has spearheaded the social psychological analysis of the commitment process. He has defined commitment "to mean the [pledging or binding of the individual to behavioral acts“ (Kiesler, 1971, pg. 30). Thus, commitment is conceptualized as a behavioral phenomenon which tends to freeze attitudes making them more resistant to subsequent change interventions. Kiesler's laboratory studies were based on the following assumptions which guided his research. (Kiesler, 1971, pg. 30-33). First, the inconsistencies between attitudes and behavioral acts which subjects are induced to perform will be reconciled by changing either the attitude or the acts. Secondly, commitment engenders a predisposition which makes actslless changeable, as well as cognitions representing 28 these acts. Thirdly, the greater the degree of commitment to some behavior, the greater the effect of commitment. Finally, the degree of commitment may be increased by varying the explicitness of the act, the importance of the act, the irrevocability of the act, the number of acts performed by the subject, and the degree of volition perceived by the subject performing the act. Kiesler and Sakumura (1966) conducted a study viewed as the classic social psychological examination of the commitment process. They hypothesized that the less the resistance to a subsequent attack on these same beliefs. The payment for some consonant behavior, the greater the following experimental design was used in this study with the subject's attitude toward the legal age of voting as the focal attitude of interest. First, all subjects were evaluated during the pretest portion of the experiment concerning their predisposition toward the attitude. Second, the subjects were then asked to tape-record a speech consonant with the beliefs. Third, all subjects were paid by the experimenter for making the speech. The payments, however, were not equal with half the subjects receiving one-dollar and the remainder receiving five-dollars. Subsequently, subjects received a strong counter- communication on the same topic. The dependent variable was the amount of attitude change each subject showed as a result 29 of reading the counter-communication. Kiesler and Sakumura predicted that the five-dollars subjects should show greater attitude change than the one-dollar subjects because they were presumably less committed to the consonant behavior. The hypothesis was confirmed. In Kiesler and Sakumura's opinion, the results conflicted with predictions made within the framework of Festinger and Carlsmith's (1959) dissonance theory. This theory would have predicted that increased payment should have produced increased resistance to the counter-attitudinal communication. In the present study, this supposition was not confirmed. Moreover, degrees of commitment to a specific behavior had no effect on existing attitudes but predisposed the subject's reaction to subsequent attack. A series of experimental studies were conducted by Kiesler and his associates which analyzed the dimensionality of the commitment construct (Kiesler, Kiesler, and Pallak, 1967; Kiesler, Pallak, and Kamouse, 1968; Kielser, Nisbett, and Zanna, 1969). For the most part, successful distinctions were made recounciling or refuting the predictions of the attribution (Kelley, 1967, 1974) and dissonance theorists (Festinger, 1957: Festinger and Carlsmith, 1959). These studies indicated to Kiesler (1971) that a number of specific factors may affect the degree of commitment. One factor has to do with one's perception of choice. In other words, one 30 needs to perceive a freedom of choice before one becomes committed and senses a feeling of responsibility for those actions. This view suggests that changing committed behavior would be difficult in a psychological sense. A change would necessitate a cognitive reorganization involving an explanation of previous behaviors. These explorations or rationalizations of previous behaviors are hypothesized as demeaning to self, and thus, the cognitive attacks promoting change are resisted. Another important factor within this behavioral commitment paradigm deals with effort expenditures. Kiesler (1971) surmised that increasing the subjects' effort \\1 expenditure should magnify the impact of any commitment manipulation. He did state, however, that the effects of effort are heterogeneous and thus a direct link between effort and behavioral commitment is somewhat difficult to detect in a laboratory setting. Kiesler's discussion of the motivational properties of behavioral commitment is of interest because it conflicts with some of the theoretical approaches to be discussed in other portions of this review. The laboratory research indicated to him that commitment alone does not have any motivational component. Commitment, from this vantage point, is viewed as being inert and noncompelling. Its binding or freezing properties, however, tend to influence one's 31 response to other forces in the situation which may compel one to react in a given manner. Put another way, commitment may predispose an individual toward an orientation, and this orientation may compel certain activities once it becomes invigorated by the stimuli surrounding a situation. Salancik (l977a) is another social psychological theorist who has extensively studied the commitment process. His frame of reference is more organizationally based than Kiesler's orientation. As a consequence, it has greater utility in terms of potential field application and our understanding of the employee/organization interface. Salancik (l977a,b) has defined organizational commitment as a / state of being in which an employees becomes bound by his actions, and through these same actions to beliefs that sustain the activities and the employee's own involvement. He also proposed that three characteristics of an individual's acts are critical in the develOpment of organizational commitment: visibility, irrevocability, and volition. With respect to the visibility of behavior, secretive or unobservable acts are thought to lack the force to commit because the person can deny or forget them. Salancik (l977a) noted that one means of committing individuals to organizations is to make their identification with the organization highly visible. For example, ‘ organizations can employ simple tactics such as announcements 32 to the local or national press when a new employee joins the organization. Commitment can also be induced by communications to an individual that the organization is aware of what the individual has done in terms of performance. Feedback concerning the employee's overall contribution to the goals of the organization is also a purposeful mechanism. The irreversibility or irrevocability of behavior implies that the behavior that has occurred cannot be changed. This characteristic is viewed as committing because a person must either assert the wisdom of past behaviors, and the salient implications which support them, or face regrets over past actions. Moreover, the greater the irreversibility of an action, the more committing it becomes. Organizational schemes such as nontransferable benefit packages and annuities which accrue on the basis of organizational tenure make attachments and commitments to organizations quite appealing. In some respects, Salancik's notion of irreversibility or irrevocability is similar to Becker's notion of side-bets. Both represent forms of employee entrapments which induce continuance commitment (Kanter, 1968) rather than value commitment (Stebbins, 1971). Salancik (l977a) suggested that volition, the acceptance of personal responsibility, was even more essential than either visibility or irrevocability. Without volition, an 33 individual could always assert that he did not cause the behavior nor accept the consequences of the behavior. This perspective differs from Kiesler's (1971) approach in a very significant manner. Salancik (1977a) views commitment as a mechanism which shapes attitudes because individuals adjust their attitudes to fit the situations to which they are committed. Over time, one individuals actions renew worthwhile beliefs, and these beliefs in turn cause the develOpment of myths which sustain a specified pattern of action. This chain of events is assumed to engender a consonance among attitudes, behaviors and beliefs. Kiesler's (1971) conceptualization, however, assumes that attitudes do not change peg 22 but that commitment fosters resistance to subsequent attacks. The Salancik (l977a) formulation also contains certain assumptions which distinguish it from the calculative-rational school. More specifically, Salancik assumes that an individual's commitment to an organization may be inhibited by the extrinsic and instrumental basis of work. When the instrumental facets of work are emphasized, Salancik contends that the task is not being performed for its own sake but for its secondary reinforcement features: that is, the benefits of the task are used to acquire something else. Thus, it is assumed that the instrumental value of a task or a job inhibits an individuals commitment 34 to same. This rational is directly counter to the structural analysis of commitment undertaken by the calculative-rational theorists (Becker, 1960: Stebbins, 1971). They view commitment as an exchange phenomenon between an employee and an organization with the contents of the exchange consisting of side-bets and investments based on employee personal characteristics. Staw and his colleagues conducted a number of experiments which supported Salancik's conceptualization of the commitment process (Staw, 1974, 1976; Staw and Fox, 1977). Staw (1974) conducted a natural field experiment which investigated the irreversibility and volitional dimensions of commitment. This study took place during the Vietnam War era and was made possible because many young men had joined the U.S. Army Reserve Officers' Training Corps to avoid being drafted. Some of these individuals were required to sign a two-year contract, while others joined the organization without signing a contract. Subsequent to this behavioral decision some of the cadets received information, a draft lottery number, which affected their perception of the organization. Those cadets that knew that they had little chance of being called up had little reason to continue in the program. The findings indicated that when cadets were not bound or committed to their organization, increased turnover resulted from a decrease in organizational 35 rewards. Also, the noncontract group tended to disparage the organization and even took part in the protest demonstrations against the war. Those cadets, however, that were contractually bound to the organization seemed to evidence a greater attachment to the organization in terms of attitudes and behaviors. It was suggested that organizational commitment was enhanced because of the irreversible and volitional characteristics of the two-year contractual obligation. Staw has conducted a number of other laboratory studies investigating the determinants of escalation in investment decision contexts. The focal point of analysis dealt with the volitional determinants of commitment to a chosen investment decision. In the initial study, Staw (1976) examined the process of escalating commitment through the simulation of a business investment decision. Business school students participated in a role-playing exercise in which personal responsibility, or volition, and decision consequences were manipulated. Staw hypothesized that individuals would invest the greatest amount of resources when they were personally responsible for negative consequences. The data of this experiment indicated that the greatest commitment of resources occurred under negative consequence conditions and under high levels of personal responsibility. Staw (1976) concluded that escalation of 36 commitment can result from adverse consequences in an adverse decision context. Staw and Fox (1977) designed an experimental study which attempted to expand upon the earlier experiment (Staw, 1976) in a number of ways. First, the transitory nature of the escalation of commitment phenomenon was examined in a longitudinal design. Second, they analyzed whether commitment to a losing alternative can be built up over time even though the decision-maker may not have been personally responsible to the chosen course of action. Finally, the efficacy of resources committed to a course of action and the impact of same on the process of escalation or withdrawal was also evaluated. The results replicated the earlier study (Staw, 1976) with escalation of resources likely to occur when individuals are responsible for negative decision consequences. The longitudinal results, however, were much more complex. Specifically, repeated negative consequences engendered a sequence of escalation, discouragement and withdrawal, and then re-escalation. The authors concluded that escalation may be a function of two factors: an over estimation of material resource capabilities and personal involvement in determining a prior course of action. Although other social psychological studies of the commitment process have been conducted and tend to support the predictions of Kiesler (1971) and Salancik (l977a,b) 37 (Cann, Sherman, and Elkes, 1975: Hoveland, Campbell and Brock, 1957: Cialdini, Cacioppo, Bassett, and Miller, 1978; Hoyt and Centers, 1972), the literature derives almost exclusively from laboratory experimentation. One problem with these studies is that support for this approach often arises from a research tradition based on deception of subjects (Alderfer, 1977). Another problem deals with generalizing results from studies using primarily college student subjects. Subjects that are often readily- manipulated and willing to please the experimenter (Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978). In an attempt to determine the generalizability of the laboratory results, Pfeffer and Lawler (1980) conducted a field study of the insufficient justification paradigm. This paradigm suggests that when individuals are committed to a task or an organization, they develop more favorable attitudes toward the task or organization when low extrinsic rewards exist. Again, this prOposition runs counter to the predictions made by the calculative-rational approach. The effects of salary, availability of job alternatives, tenure, and the length of time in the organization on satisfaction with the organization and intention to leave the organization were investigated. Subjects for the study consisted of a random sample of college and university faculty drawn from the Carnegie Council's 1969 survey. The authors defined 38 behavioral commitment as commitment which results from actions which are taken. Such actions are thought to be committing because once accomplished they cannot be undone, and thus an individual must rationalize subsequent attitudes in terms of previous actions. In the present study, behavioral commitment was operationalized as either length of time in the organization or tenure. The data indicated that a weak form of the insufficient justification hypothesis can be supported in a field experiment. This form of insufficient justification implies that there is an interaction between behavioral commitment and extrinsic rewards. More specifically, the relationship between extrinsic rewards and attitudes is weaker for those subjects having a greater degree of behavioral commitment to the task or the organization. The results supported this hypothesis. A significant interaction between length of time in the organization and the amount of salary was observed. Moreover, subjects not behaviorally committed showed a positive relationship between salary and satisfaction, while committed subjects did not evidence a similar relationship. The review of the organizational commitment literature has up to this point analyzed the calculative-rational approach and the social psychological approach. The commitment mechanisms proposed by these schools of thought differ to a certain extent but share one common proposition. 39 The calculative-rational approach views commitment as channelized behavior, inhibited by side-bets and penalties I which threaten the loss of accrued investments. On the other hand, the social psychological approach posits commitment as a state of mind which results from a variety of rationalizations concerning an individuals earlier behavior or actions. Both approaches, however, share the view thatR the causes of commitment are vested within an individual's / activity domain. In other words, the individual either passively or actively engages in activities which subsequently cloth his commitment predisposition. The Motivational-Affective Approach Unlike the other approaches discussed below, the motivational-affective approach places more emphasis on the organization. This approach has its origins in the work of Porter and his associates (Porter, Crampon, and Smith, 1976; Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian, 1974; Steers, 1977), and contains linkages to the work of these researchers in the areas of work motivation and employee need satisfaction. Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian (1974) defined commitment as the relative strength of an individual's identification with and involvement in a particular N organization. Moreover, these scholars posited that organizational commitment could be characterized by the 40 following components: (1) a strong belief in and acceptance of the organization's goals and values: (2) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the organization: and (3) a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization. Commitment defined in this fashion represents active rather than passive loyalty to an organzation. This approach views the employee-employer relationship as integrative such that the employee is willing to give something of himself in order to contribute to the welfare of the organization. The motivational-affective approach has identified a number of antecedent categories which may effect the organizational commitment process. These categories are: personal characteristics, job or role-related characteristics, structural influences, and work experiences. Although additional research evidence will be provided in Chapter III justifying the inclusion of specific antecedents in a proposed heuristic model, this portion of the literature review will discuss the research related to the (motivational-affective approach in more general terms. Two multivariate studies have been conducted utilizing the motivational-affective paradigm (Steers, 1977: Morris and Sherman, 1981).1 Steers (1977) conducted a study among 1 Stevens, Byer, and Trice (1978) conducted another multi- variate study but it employed a calculative-rational framework. 41 hospital employees, scientists, and engineers which exemplifies the multi-dimensional stance taken by motivation scholars. He investigated the potential effects of three sets of factors on organizational commitment. He labeled these factors: personal characteristics which are expected to influence commitment included age, opportunities for achievement, education, role tension, and central life interests. Job characteristics expected to influence commitment were job challenge, opportunities for social interaction, and performance feedback. The third, and final, antecedent category was work experiences during the employee's tenure in the organization. Such experiences included: (1) group attitudes toward the organization: (2) the extent to which subjects' expectations were met by the realities of the job; (3) feelings of personal importance of the organization based upon the actions of the organization over time; and (4) the extent to which the organization was seen as being dependable in carrying out its commitments to employees. The results of the study indicated that the antecedents of organizational commitment are quite diverse and that major influences can be found in all of the antecedent categories previously defined. It was also found that work experiences were more closely related to commitment than the other two sets of variables. With respect to the multiple regression 42 results, six antecedent variables were significant predictors of organizational commitment: need for achievement, group attitudes toward the organization, education (inversely), organizational dependability, personal importance to the organization, and task identity. Morris and Sherman (1981) also conducted a multivariate predictive study of organizational commitment. The research setting for this study consisted of three care and training facilities for deve10pmentally disabled persons. The model used by Morris Sherman (1981) contained variables representing each of Steer's (1977) three antecedent categories. Within the personal characteristic category, age, education, and sense of competence emerged as highly significant predictors of organizational commitment. Role conflict, an item within the role-related category, also emerged as a significant predictor. Finally, two leadership behaviors, consideration and initiating structure also significantly predicted organizational commitment. Morris and Sherman (1981) also performed a generalizability analysis of their model. This analysis examined the aggregated model's sensitivity to differences in job level, job focus, and organizational membership. The analysis indicated that the above nuisance variables did not significantly alter the functional structure of the model nor its ability to predict levels of organizational commitment. 43 Buchanan (1974a) is another contemporary motivational- affective scholar who has defined commitment as a ”. . . partisan, affective attachment to the goals and values of the organization for its own sake, apart from its purely instrumental worth“ (Buchanan, 1974a, pg. 533). This psychological bond between employees and their organization was thought to consist of the following three components: (1) identification - adoption as one's own the goals and values of the organization; (2) involvement - psychological immersion or absorption in the activities of one's work role: and (3) loyalty - a feeling of affection for and attachment to the organization (Buchanan, 1974a, pg. 533). Buchanan (1974a, b) conducted a questionnaire survey of business and government managers attempting to determine which organizational experiences had the greatest impact on organizational commitment and how organizational commitment varied at different career stages. With respect to the first issue, the following six experiences contributed significantly to organizational commitment: personal importance, first-year group attitudes toward the organization, organizational dependability, organizational commitment norms, first-year job challenge, and the current group attitudes toward the organization. Moreover, organizational commitment increased significantly with years of service or tenure in the organization. Finally, the 44 results reported in the study indicated that different experiences within tenure groups led to divergent organizational commitment predictions. For example, the stage two results illustrated that self-image and personal importance were the primary determinants of organizational commitment at this level. These two studies, and others to be discussed in Chapter III, emphasize the notion that there are a number of potential influences on organizational commitment. A common theme, however, seems to be engrained in these variables, [ namely, the notion of exchange or integration (Homans 1961;( Argyris, 1964). Individuals enter organizations with a variety of skills, abilities, needs, and expectations based on previous experiences. Typically, they enter the world of work hoping that organizations will be able to satisfy some of their diverse needs and expectations. When organizations are able and willing to provide these opportunities, and view/ that realization of same promotes organizational vitality, ‘ organizational commitment may be enhanced. On the other . hand, when organizations are not viewed by employees as being{ dependable providers of these various employee expectations, organizational commitment may be relatively low. Two major consequences of organizational commitment have been previously examined in the motivational - affective literature: employee absenteeism and turnover. The theory 45 underlying the motivational-affective approach would predict that highly committed employees would be less inclined to be absent than their less committed counterparts. This hypothesis is based on the premise that highly committed employees would want to be in attendance so that they could ( help facilitate organizational goal attainment. Thus, the theory would suggest that organizational commitment should induce employee attendance motivation. Only two published studies have analyzed the relationship between attendance and organizational commitment. Smith (1977) examined the relationship between attitudes and attendance of managerial personnel on a day following an unexpected severe snowstorm. The findings indicated that a proxy for organizational commitment, company identification, was significantly related to attendance. These results, from Smith's perspective, indicated that attitudes such as company identification can predict work—related behavior when such behavior is under the control of the subject. In an investigation of similar relationships, however, inconclusive or divergent results were reported by Steers (1977). As previously mentioned, Steers (1977) conducted a study among two diverse samples of employees: one sample consisted of hospital employees while the other consisted of research scientists and engineers. More specifically, 46 organizational commitment was found to be related to attendance for the scientist and engineering sample but not for the sample composed of hospital employees. These ambivalent results can be partially explained by the limited scope of the studies. Organizational commitment represents one potential influence on attendance motivation. Steers and Rhodes (1978), however, have identified other pertinent influences, for example: the job situation, employee values and job expectations, personal characteristics, pressures to attend, and ability to attend. These tentative results, therefore, are not surprising when one considers that the models used in these studies may be incomplete. Moreover, the premise outlined above dealing with organizational goal attainment implies a congruity between individual and organizational goals. Yet, the potential moderating influence of individual-organizational goal congruity has not been investigated. The theory underlying the motivational-affective approach to organizational commitment suggests that the most predictable behavioral outcome of employee commitment should be reduced employee turnover. By definition, highly committed employees should be desirous of working toward organizational goals. Thus, they should be less likely to leave and should be desirous of remaining with the organization. 47 Three studies have used predictive-correlational designs to examine the commitment-turnover relationship (Koch and Steers, 1978; Mowday, Steers and Porter, 1979: Steers, 1977). All three studies reported significant correlations between commitment and subsequent employee turnover. Steers (1977) also found that organizational commitment was significantly related to desire to remain and intent to remain in the organization. An important distinction comparing the relative predictive powers of organizational commitment and job satisfaction on turnover behavior was undertaken by Koch and Steers (1978). They reported that organizational commitment was a better predictor of turnover than overall job satisfaction or any facet of satisfaction. These divergent results were explained by emphasizing that job satisfaction measures typically focus on affective responses rather than behavioral intentions. These studies offer partial support for a conceptual model of intermediate linkages in the relationship between organizational commitment and turnover. Mobley (1977) posited that job dissatisfaction leads to the following intermediate linkages: thoughts of quitting, intention to search, and intentions of staying or leaving. These intermediate linkages, in turn, lead to subsequent turnover behavior. In a similar fashion, organizational commitment may indirectly influence turnover through these same intermediate linkages. 48 Similar findings have been reported in a series of studies which have examined the organizational commitment - turnover relationship via longitudinal designs. One study evaluated the commitment levels of psychiatric technicians over time (Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian, 1974). Organizational commitment was found to be significantly and inversely related to turnover and this relationship seemed to increase over time. More specifically, for those employees who remained in the organization commitment increased over time while commitment declined over time for those employees that eventually left the organization. In addition, commitment to the organization seemed to be a better predictor of employee turnover when compared with the traditional measures of job satisfaction. A somewhat different longitudinal study was conducted among a sample of managerial trainees in a large merchandising company (Porter, Crampon, and Smith, 1976). In this study, commitment patterns were tracked from the employees first day on the job up to the end of the first fifteen months of employment. This design has significant implications because the turnover literature indicates that an employee's initial period of membership in an organization is highly critical because of its inculcation potential. The authors concluded that management trainees that left the organization on a voluntary basis during the first fifteen 49 months of employment tended to evidence a marked decline in organizational commitment prior to their actual separation date. Put another way, a decline in organizational commitment should strongly suggest to an organization that an employee will more than likely voluntarily terminate from the organization in the near future. In a related study, Krackhardt, McKenna, Porter, and Steers (1981) conducted a controlled field experiment using fifty branches of a large West Coast bank. The experiment was aimed at building commitment and reducing turnover by modifying supervisory behavior. Supervisory workshops were held and the intervention consisted of supervisors develoPing goals which could result in reduced employee turnover. The intervention proved to be marginally successful: not all of the branches implemented the goals. Those branches that did implement goals, however, did initially experience a drop in employee commitment. The authors speculated that this drop was engendered by the intervention because it caused employees to scrutinize their reasons for organizational attachments. Subsequently, attitudinal evaluations evidenced an increase in organizational commitment and a marked decrease in employee turnover. This review of the motivational-affective approach to organizational commitment has disclosed a number of items. First, the antecedents of organizational commitment are quite 50 varied and can be identified as falling within a number of categories. Moreover, the construct has also been investigated because of its potential influence on employee absenteeism and turnover. In summary, this review has focused on three major theoretical approaches to the study of organizational commitment and their underlying propositions. The calculative-rational (Becker, 1960; Stebbins, 1971) and the social psychological (Kiesler, 1971: Salancik, 1977a; Staw, 1974) approaches view commitment as a behavioral phenomenon. That is, an employee is thought to be committed if he or she is bound by past actions or has accrued costs or investments in the organization. On the other hand, the motivational- affective approach (Steers, 1977; Morris and Sherman, 1981; Sheldon, 1971; Kanter, 1968) considers organizational commitment as an attitudinal phenomenon. This conceptualization views commitment as an integrative mechanism where an employee identifies with organizational goals and objectives and desires to retain attachment to the organization in order to facilitate these goals. On the surface, these approaches may seem to be diametrically opposed in terms of their commitment perspectives. It may be the case, however, that these perspectives are in fact complementary when viewed in light of an employee's organizational life cycle. In other words, 51 . \ , ._\\ both attit'des and behaviors may need to be viewed as interactive influences of the organizational commitment process. At any point in time during an individual's organizational life cycle either behayigrs or attitudes may play a crucial role in the development of organizational commitment. These relevant influences may impact a specific segment of an individual's commitment space, and thus, varying types of commitment may need to be evaluated in order to determine the totality of an individual's organizational commitment. CHAPTER III THE HEURISTIC MODEL, RELATED RESEARCH, AND HYPOTHESESE Introduction This chapter is composed of three related elements. The first portion briefly describes the heuristic model to be investigated, and provides the structural justification of the variables contained in the model. The second portion reviews the literature as it relates to the variables included in the model. Finally, specific hypotheses are generated based on the literature reviews associated with the variables. The Heuristic Model The literature review discussed in Chapter II indicates that the motivational-affective perspective encompasses, and goes beyond, the important aspects of the other approaches. {As a consequence, this approach will serve as the basis for kthe present research endeavor. Steers (1977) multi- dimensional framework has been employed by other researchers (Morris and Sherman, 1981: Stevens, Beyer, and Trice, 1978) 52 53 in an attempt to explain both psychological and structural determinants of organizational commitment. Steers (1977) examined the potential effects of three sets of organizational commitment determinants: personal characteristics, job characteristics, and work experiences. In a like fashion, the present dissertation employed Steers (1977) general framework with several specific modifications. Some of the variables discussed below were incorporated into Steers (1977) model and have been analyzed by others investigating the commitment construct. Other variables, however, were not investigated by Steers (1977), and have never been directly investigated within the framework employed in this dissertation. The heuristic model under investigation is presented in Figure l and consists of two major parts: (1) antecedents of commitment, and (2) a commitment outcome. The antecedent influences can be grouped into three categories<’ personal characteristics, work related attitudes, and compensation related attitudes. Moreover, intent to remain represents the \/ behavioral outcome of the commitment process. 54 FIGURE 1 A Heuristical Model of Organizational Commitment A. Personal Characteristics Age Length of Service (tenure) Education Level \ Organizational ——9 Intent to B. Work Related Attitudes Commitment Remain Job Involvement Perceived Functional Dependence Perceived Decentralization Perceived Formalization Union/Association Commitment C. Compensation Related Attitudes Perceived Wage Equity-Self Referent Perceived Wage Equity-Multiple Referent 55 In selecting variables to represent each of the above categories, Steers' (1977) general framework was used as a guide but other criteria were used as well. First, because of the limited sample size and the power difficulties associated with same, as few predictor variables as possible were included in the model. This was accomplished with the intention of explaining sufficient variation in organizational commitment at a level that was both statistically and practically significant. Second, variables within each category were identified and included in the model if they were supported by the organizational commitment literature, relevant theoretical extensions, and broadly represented the phenomenon characterized by each respective category. The Literature Review and Hypotheses Although three theories dealing with organizational commitment and their related findings were reviewed in Chapter II, the following literature review specifically deals with the variables isolated for analytical purposes in Figure 1. Moreover, hypotheses will be proposed for each segment of the literature review regarding the predicted relationship between the specified variable and organizational commitment. Personal characteristics. This category deals with measures which define the individual. Numerous studies have 56 examined the potential effects of this group of correlates on organizational commitment (Steers, 1977; Ritzer and Trice, 1969: Alutto, Hrebiniak, and Alonso, 1973; Brown, 1969; Morris and Sherman, 1981; Sheldon 1971). Support for using personal characteristics as correlates and/or predictors of organizational commitment has often been derived from Becker's (1960) side-bet theory of organizational commitment. Becker (1960) suggested that certain personal characteristics asuch as age and tenure in the organization, increase an Kindividual's investment in the employing organization, and :thus the costs of leaving become virtually insurmountable. March and Simon (1958) proposed a similar analysis. They noted that as an employee's age or tenure in the organization increases the perceived availability of extra organizational job alternatives decreases. As a result, an individual's decreased perception regarding ease of movement may in turn increase the individual's perceived attractiveness of the present organization. This increased *attractiveness is assumed to engender increased psychological attachment to the present organization. Three personal characteristics will be examined in this study: age, length of service and education.1 Both 222 and length pf service have been found to be positively related to Gender, marital status, and race were initially considered as potential correlates of organizational commitment but insufficient variability resulted in their exclusion. 57 organizational commitment (Sheldon, 1971: Lee, 1971: Koch and Steers, 1978: Kidron, 1978: Morris and Sherman, 1981: Hall, Schneider, and Nygren, 1970; Brown, 1969: Buchanan, 1974a: Hall and Schneider, 1972: Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972). As a consequence, the following hypothesese dealing with age and length g£_service were tested. H1: Organizational commitment is positively related to age. H2: Organizational commitment is positively related to length of service. Unlike the research evidence dealing with age and length of service, education has often been found to be inversely , related to organizational commitment (Morris and Sherman, 1981; Steers, 1977: Koch and Steers, 1976; Stevens, Beyer and Trice, 1978; Kidron, 1978; Morris and Steers, 1980). Some have suggested that this inverse relationship exists because the higher the level of education the greater the conflict between job responsibilities and an employee's self image (March and Simon, 1958). Put another way, organizational commitment may be dampened when highly educated individuals\\ have certain expectations which can not be met by the organization. High levels of educational attainment may also reflect a potential for multiple employee allegiances. Thus, if an employee is committed to a profession, association, or union, an employee's psychological attachment may be splintered, which might lessen the employee's organizational 58 commitment. The above discussion resulted in the testing of the following hypothesis dealing with level 9: education: H3: Organizational commitment is inversely related to level of education. Work related attitudes. This category deals with the nature and quality of an employee's work related attitudes during his/her tenure in the organization. It has been suggested that the nature of work responsibilities, and the experience associated with the job, may represent criticalfi socializing forces which influence an individual's organizational commitment. Multiple allegiances may alter i the potential influence of these socializing mechanisms and lead to reduced psychological attachment, and organizational commitment. The work related attitudes category contains variables which represent both of the above mentioned propositions. The category consists of the following variables: perceived organizational structural characteristics (formalization, functional dependence, and decentralization), job involvement, and union commitment. Over the years, a variety of reviews have examined the relationship of organization structure to members' attitudes and behaviors (Porter and Lawler, 1965; Porter and Steers, 1973: James and Jones, 1976; Herman, Dunham, and Hulin, 1975; Newman, 1976; Cummings and Berger, 1976). Porter and Lawler (1965) published the first review dealing with this topic. 59 Although their reported findings were mixed, and the hypothesized direction of their findings was far from conclusive, they were able to suggest a general summary statement. Specifically, they suggested that higher-level) positions, line authority, small organizational subunit and[ total size, and flatter organizations tended to engender more positive employee attitudes and behaviors. More recently, Cummings and Berger (1976) provided an updated review of Porter and Lawler's findings. They concluded that research findings did not establish a consistent relationship between structural properties of organizations and their member's attitudes and behaviors. Definitive conclusions were difficult to justify for a number of reasons. First, cause-and-effect statements were muddied by a number of environmental contingencies; and the interrelation among organizational structural variables was not always assessed. Second, inappropriate designs and analyses, and inconsistent use of terminology and measurement techniques, made interpretation of results quite difficult. Several studies have also been conducted evaluating structural antecedents of organizational commitment (Stevens, Beyer and Trice, 1978: Morris and Steers, 1980: Rhodes and Steers, 1981). The first study was undertaken by Stevens, Beyer and Trice (1978) in their examination of managerial commitment in federal government organizations. In this \ 60 interorganizational study, four structural variables (organizational size, union presence, span of control, and centralization of authority) were found to be unrelated to organizational commitment. These authors concluded that role-related factors, rather than organizational structural variables, represented the most critical determinants of organizational commitment. In a related study, Morris and Steers (1980) partially replicated and extended the previously mentioned study. Two underlying assumptions were used by these authors to guide them in their selection of structural variables. First, employees were expected to experience these variables in a direct and meaningful manner. That is, rather than analyzing global organizational characteristics, such as organizational pipe and leyel within the organization, the authors emphasized characteristics which were more immediate and relevant to employees within organizations. Second, in addition to objective measures of structural characteristics, the authors also evaluated employee perceptions regarding certain structural variables. These employee perceptions were deemed important because they reflected the manner in which various structural arrangements were used to organize and coordinate the employees' work. The results reported by Morris and Steers (1980) partially supported Stevens, Beyer, and Trice (1978), but 61 there were some important differences. More specifically, the objective structural variables, that is, span of control, span of subordination, and work group size, were unrelated to organizational commitment. However, perceived formalization, 1..., 1 perceived functional dependence, and perceived gecentralization were positively related to organizational commitment. The authors concluded that employees' 'fexperiencing greater decentralization, greater dependence on 'the work of other employees, and greater formalization of 1 written rules and procedures felt more committed to the organization than their counterparts. A more recent study (Rhodes and Steers, 1981) supports the results reported by Morris and Steers's (1980). This study was based on a sample of matched plywood mills. One research setting consisted of worker-owners in a producer cooperative, while the other mill was owned by a conventional wood-products firm. It was hypothesized that worker-owners in a cooperative should experience higher perceptions of participation in decision-making than employees in the conventional organization. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that these perceptions should engender greater commitment to the organization. Both hypotheses were confirmed in this study. It should be noted that the participation in decision making variables approximates Morris and Steers's (1980) perceived decentalization variable, and thus, lends support 62 to the notion that perceived structural characteristics may be relevant organizational commitment correlates. As a consequence of the above review, the following hypotheses were tested dealing with perceived functional dependence, perceived decentalization, and perceived formalization: H4: Organizational commitment is positively related to perceived functional dependence. H5: Organizational commitment is positively related to perceived decentalization. H6: Organizational commitment is positively related to perceived formalization. The next variable to be examined in this dissertation is employee job involvement. Lodahl and Kejner (1965, p. 24) defined job involvement as "the degree to which a person is identified psychologically with his work, or the importance of work to his total self-image." In other words, job involvement deals with the degree to which an employee's a 1 self-esteem is affected by his work performance. Research has generally supported a positive relationship between job involvement and a number of relevant outcome variables (Rabinowitz and Hall, 1977). More specifically, the literature indicates a consistent positive relationship between job involvement and intrinsically based job satisfaction (Steers, 1975: Schuler, 1975; Weissenberg and Gruenfeld, 1968). With respect to behavioral outcome 63 relationships, job involvement has been found to be positively and significantly related to union participation (Huszczo, 1975: Nicholson, Ursell and Blyton, 1980), absenteeism, turnover, and work quality (Mirvis and Lawler, 1977). Although the number of studies that have examined the potential influence of job involvement on organizational commitment is relatively sparse, the findings seem quite consistent. Only three studies were found relating organizational commitment to job involvement. The first study (Weiner and Gechman, 1977) viewed job involvement and work commitment as relatively interchangeable constructs. Work commitment behavior was operationalized as a special class of socially acceptable behaviors that exceeded formal and/or normative expectations dealing with work. In this study, work commitment was measured by documenting the amount of personal time that each subject devoted to work-related activities beyond the required working day. The results indicated a positive relationship between two attitudinal measures of job involvement and behavioral commitment. The second study (Stevens, Beyer and Trice, 1978) was conducted in the federal sector among managerial employees. It was hypothesized that involved employees would tend to I '7 I l have substantial side-bet investment in their employing K organization, which would enhance their organizational 64 commitment. This hypothesis was confirmed with job involvement positively and significantly related to organizational commitment. The third, and final study examining this relationship was undertaken in a research and development firm (Eisenberg, 1981). The findings indicated a complex relationship from network integration to organizational commitment which was moderated by degree of employee involvement. More specifically, employees who were not involved in their jobs were found to be committed only if they were integrated into 5the job-relatedflnetwork function. This disordinal interaction indicated to the author that different commitment processes may operate differentially depending upon employee personal characteristics. The potential influence of job involvement on organizational commitment is additionally supported by a related research area dealing with the values held by employees. Several studies have indicated that employees with a strong personal work ethic tend to be highly committed to their organizations (Buchanan, l974a,b: Hall and Schneider, 1972: Kidron, 1978; Card, 1978). For example, Dubin, Champoux, and Porter (1975) investigated the relationship between central life interests of workers and. their commitment to the organization. According to these authors, central life interest of employees is defined as 65 their preference for carrying out their activities in given institutional settings” (Dubin, Champoux and Porter, 1975, p. 411). They found that workers with a central life interest in work had a higher commitment to their work organization, and had a higher level of attraction to specific features of their organization, as compared to other employees with dissimilar central life interest pr0pensities. The rationale posited for the above results is closely related to Becker's (1960) side-bet theory. That is, if work is considered as a central life interest, then attachment to the organization g and its associated opportunities should be greater than alternative attachments associated with other central life interests. Job involvement and central life interest in work seem to be constructs which reflect related segments of an employee's work attitude perceptual space. Thus, the above findings tend to support the following job involvement hypothesis: H7: Organizational commitment is positively related to job involvement. The variables and associated hypotheses discussed above have been incorporated into prior analyses dealing with the commitment construct. The variables discussed below, however, have never been directly investigated as regards to organizational commitment. 66 An area of research which has been virtually unexplored by organizational commitment scholars deals with the influence of multiple commitments and the conflicts which may be created for employees. In discussing the identification construct, March and Simon (1958, p. 65-67) propose four available targets for identification: (1) organizations external to the focal organization (extraorganizational identification); (2) the focal organization itself (organizational identification); (3) the work activities involved in the job (task identification); and (4) the subgroups within the focal organization (job group identification). They hypothesized that employee identification was a function of perceived congruence between the individual and group norms and goals. This definition is quite similar to Stebbins (1970) notion of value commitment and is partly reflected in Buchanan's (1974a) definition of organizational commitment, which contains an identification component. Although all four identification targets are of importance in any organizational behavior analysis, the extraorganizational target group is of specific importance. March and Simon (1958) indicated that professional association's community groups, family groups, and trade unions fell within the extraorganizational category. All of these examples reflect potential multiple allegiance sources 67 which may either reduce or enhance an employee's organizational commitment. When analyzing the organizational commitment of employees performing nursing related duties in a unionized setting, the potential influence of the union/association as an extraorganizational target seems quite relevant. Since the early 1950's, labor relations scholars have investigated the concept of dual allegiance2 to the employer and the union/association. Stagner and Rosen (1965, P. 68-70) have distinguished between the concepts of allegiance, unilateral allegiance, and dual allegiance in the following manner: ...we shall use the term allegiance to refer to the fact that an individual feels involved with the welfare of a group and wants it to prosper; unilateral allegiance is that in which the individual has these feelings about the company only, or about the union only, and dual allegiance is that in which the individual wants both organizations to succeed. The prevalent view prior to these studies was the notion that employees perceive a fundamental and inflexible conflict of interests between union/association and management. This proposition implied that an employee could not be a loyal employee and a loyal union member. The role constraints were thought to be so inflexible that employees were required to make institutional specific decisions regarding their roles. 2 Authors in this area use the terms dual allegiance and dual commitment interchangeably. 68 For the most part, the research results have supported the concept of dual commitment. Katz (1949) conducted a study in a large midwestern automotive factory. Katz reported that in this particular setting the labor relations climate had been quite impressive and constructive for a number of years. He commented that the majority of the employees gave credit to both the union and management for the good working relationship. Moreover, a majority of the employees indicated that the company was interested in the welfare of the union, and that the union was interested in the welfare of the company. Surprisingly, only twenty percent of the work force stated that union and management were not interested in the accomplishment of similar goals and objectives. Probably the most extensive investigation of the dual commitment phenomenon was conducted by Purcell (1954, 1953). He interviewed over 385 members of a United Packing House Workers' local at Swift and Company in Chicago. Purcell distinguished between allegiance, loyalty, and dual allegiance. With respect to the concept of allegiance, he defined it as a favorable attitude towards the company or the union as institutions, or a general approval of their over- all institutional policies. Loyalty, on the other hand, was viewed as an emotional attachment to a specific institution. Finally, dual allegiance was defined as the approval, by 69 employees, of the objectives and overall policies of the company and the union. Dual allegiance, from Purcell's perspective, does not necessitate obedience to the immediate collective bargaining demands of either institution. Thus, Purcell noted, that if the union leadership could document and substantiate a strike the workers would not necessarily refute such a decision even if they possessed a dual allegiance disposition. Purcell's findings indicated that employees possess dual allegiance and that they believe in both company and union as viable institutions. More specifically, approximately three-fourths of the nonsupervisory employees, more than eighty percent of the shOp stewards, and slightly more than half of the foremen evidenced dual allegiance. Purcell suggested that employees perceived the modern unionized factory as a political entity with two co-existing governing bodies. These perceptions of mutual dependence were thought to be engendered by the psychological and economic contingencies impacting any plant situation. Similar results were reported by Stagner (1954) in a detailed study of union-management relations in Illini City, a medium-sized midwestern community. Eight organizations were studied with employee interview data coded for favorable company and union perceptions. Each analysis supported the dual allegiance hypothesis. The evidence suggested that 70 employee perceptions were generally based on the whole relationship between the union and the company, rather than any specific perception. Thus, if employees were satisfied with the entire situation, positive perceptions toward the company and the union would result. On the other hand, levels of generalized dissatisfaction tended to result in dissatisfaction toward the company and the union. Although the hypothesis was never tested, Stagner (1954) prOposed that the labor management relationship had to be sufficiently mature before any dual allegiance perceptions could be formed. Dean (1954) conducted a research study which also investigated the dual allegiance phenomenon among unionized factory workers employed by three different organizations. This study, however, can be distinguished from the studies discussed above because a comparative analysis and a multi-method data gathering procedure were involved. The findings reported in this study partially reinforced the findings of the other dual allegiance studies but they also extended this area of research significantly. With respect to the replicated findings, the author indicated that dual allegiance toward the company and the union can only take place when the degree of conflict in the labor management relationship is minimized. The potential moderating influence of a behavioral factor, attendance at 71 union meetings, was proposed as a significant theoretical extension. Dean indicated that the union meeting may have a selective and reinforcement function. That is, dual loyalty predispositions may be influenced by the employee's perception of the union-management relationship, and by employee attendance at union meetings. More specifically, the existing union-management relationship may differentially motivate employees to attend union meetings. Thus, the employees choosing to participate and the attitudes reinforced in the union meeting may be the result of the degree of perceived union-management conflict. The dual commitment literature has been criticized for a number of short-coming. First, the use of case studies and anecdotal reports of informal interviews has been viewed as inadequate from a methodological standpoint (Schriesheim and Tsui, 1980). Second, the statistical analyses, or lack thereof, have also been questioned. Some have suggested that correlational analyses might have been more persuasive than comparisons of numbers contained in scatter-plot quadrants (Gordon, Beauvais, and Ladd, 1984). Finally, the construct validity of dual commitment has also been discussed because it has been measured in a relatively inconsistent manner (Gordon, Beauvais, and Ladd, 1984). For example, Purcell (1954) assessed union members' allegiance to both their company and their union, while Stagner (1954) inferred 72 allegiance by examining the relationship between measures of union satisfaction and management satisfaction. In an attempt to eliminate some of the above methodological deficiencies, there has been a recent attempt to develop a standardized measure of union commitment. Gordon, Philpot, Burt, Thompson, and Spiller (1980) developed such a measure based on a study using a large sample of non- professional white-collar employees of a utility company. They develOped a union commitment scale which produced four interpretable dimensions: union loyalty, responsibility to the union, willingness to work for the union, and belief in unionism. Analysis disclosed that socialization experiences were the best predictors of union loyalty and belief in unionism, while self-reports by the respondents of past and present union activity were the strongest correlates of the remaining dimensions. Moreover, these authors reported that a number of satisfaction measures were found to be correlates of one or more of the commitment dimensions. Of specific interest to this dissertation are the dual allegiance results. Stagner's (1954) findings were replicated in this study with significant correlations reported between satisfaction with the union and with management. Gordon, Beauvais, and Ladd (1984) conducted a related study which investigated the relationship between union commitment and job satisfaction. Unionized engineers 73 composed the sample of major interest. For comparison purposes, however, identical data were collected on a sample of unionized technicians and a sample of nonprofessional white-collar workers. It should be noted that all of these individuals were employed by a southern public utility and that empirical support for dual allegiance was also reported. Those respondents who reported satisfaction with the utility's management also were inclined to be satisfied with their union. With respect to group differences regarding union commitment and job satisfaction, the engineers and technicians did not differ markedly on these two constructs. The engineers, however, did express a greater degree of union commitment than their nonprofessional counterparts. It is interesting to note that all of the studies reviewed above provide some empirical support for the dual allegiance hypothesis. None of these studies, however, have collected data which properly operationalizes the dimensionality of the dual allegiance construct. More specifically, they infer the existence of dual allegiance if a positive relationship exists between union and organizational satisfaction. Yet, a close examination of the definition of allegiance provided by Purcell (1954) and Stagner (1954) seems to equate allegiance with commitment rather than satisfaction. Based on the previously discussed review, the following union/association commitment hypothesis can therefore be stated: 74 H8: Organizational commitment is positively related to union/association commitment. Compensation related attitudes. For the most part, researchers utilizing the motivational-affective approach have focused on the intrinsic characteristics of the job (Salancik, l977a,b). Intrinsic factors are of primary interest because it is assumed that if these factors are ‘ highly prevalent, then the employee will experience a greatei degree of felt responsibility, enjoyment, and resultant organizational commitment. Only one study (Rhodes and Steers, 1981), however, has investigated the instrumental nature of member attachment to the organization. In a unionized setting, one would suspect that instrumental facets of the job, such as compensation equity,‘ could greatly influence an employee's organizational commitment. This premise is partially based on the philOSOphical tenets underlying trade unionism, which emphasize the instrumental nature of member attachment to the union/association (Hoxie, 1919: Blau and Scott, 1962). Some view trade unionism as an economic movement to improve wages, hours and working conditions (Webb and Webb, 1920). These goals are primarily established by taking wages and other benefits out of competition by employing collective action strategies. Others such as Perlman (1928) minimize the pure economic aspects or consequences of unionism and focus, 75 instead, on the psychology of unionism. Perlman (1928) theorized that workers engage in concerted activity because they are motivated by a type Of economic pessimism. Specifically, this pessimism is engendered by a job scarcity myopia which manifests itself in the form of job consciousness. To maximize control over this scarce job resource, employees organize into groups which assert their collective ownership over these scarce Opportunities by rationing them fairly on the basis of a common rule (Perlman, 1928). These tenets are laden with instrumental values. Moreover, the basic goals of the labor movement have not changed dramatically through the years and are also heavily vested with instrumental features. The goals are: survival, improving the wages, terms, and conditions of employment for its membership, protecting the job interests of members, and developing a system Of industrial jurisprudence. In a unionized setting, these ideologies may be so salient that they become relevant components of an employee's cognitive map. If this is so, then perceptions dealing with instrumental features Of the job may affect the degree of an employee's organizational commitment. The degree of \l perceived wage equity may capture the potential importance of g / these instrumental job features. A number Of different theoretical perspectives dealing \ with the phenomenon of social exchanges or the social 76 comparison process have been espoused through the years (Festinger, 1954: Merton, 1957: Homans, 1961). Adams' (1963, 1965) theory Of equity, however, is probably the most relevant in terms of understanding how individuals evaluate social exchange relationships, and is also the most fully articulated. Two major components of the exchange relationship are ,‘inputs and outcomes. What an individual gives or contributes in any exchange are viewed as inputs or investments. In an employment relationship, potential employee inputs include: education, intelligence, experience, training, skill, seniority, age, and sex. Moreover, for inputs to be considered they must be recognized as existing by one or both parties in the exchange and must be viewed as relevant to the employment relationship. The outcomes of an exchange relationship are things that an individual may receive. In an employment setting, potential outcomes include: pay,‘\\ satisfying supervision, seniority benefits, fringe benefitfi, status symbols, and working conditions. In order to be J considered in evaluating exchange relationships, outcomes must also be recognized and considered relevant by the participants. The third major theoretical component is the reference person or group used in evaluating the equity propensity of an individual's exchange relationship. Potential reference \ \ 77 sources are virtually unlimited and may include: the person or self, coworkers, profession, relative, neighbor and labor market patterns. Sources are assumed to be relevant components only if they possess one or more attributes which are comparable to those of the individuals involved in the equity process. Adams (1965) did not fully specify the manner in which an individual would select the appropriate referent. He did, however, indicate that the coworker referent category would be commonly used. The theory suggests that the social comparison process proceeds in the following fashion. First, individuals weigh their inputs and outcomes in accordance with the importance / they place on each factor. Second, separate summations for inputs and outcomes are cognitively computed and viewed as 3 independent contributors. Third, the individual compares the ratio of his or her outcomes to inputs with the referent's ratio Of outcomes to inputs. Finally, inequity is said to exist when the ratio of an individual's outcomes to inputs is perceived as being greater to or less than the ratio perceived for the referent source. On the other hand, equity is said to exist when the individual's ratio is perceived as being equal to the referent source's ratio. Adams (1965) also hypothesized that the inequity. condition should engender certain motivational consequences.1 More specifically, perceived inequity is assumed to create 78 tension in the individual, and the amount of tension is assumed to be proportional to the amount of perceived inequity. Also, the tension that is created by the inequity condition is assumed to motivate the individual to reduce it. He also posited a number of different methods than an individual could engage in to reduce the inequity condition: altering outcomes, altering inputs, distorting one's own inputs and outcomes, acting on the inputs or outcomes of the ; reference source, changing the reference source, or leaving 1 the field. \ With respect to the employer-employee exchange \relationship, the majority of the early equity research focused on employee reaction to pay inequities. The majority were laboratory studies which attempted to~distinguish between overreward and underreward inequities. In addition, two different methods of compensation were examined; hourly versus piece rate. In general, studies have supported the equity theory predictions regarding inequitable payment (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978). The underreward condition studies have tended to support the theory in both piece rate and hourly pay circumstances. Piece rate subjects have been found to increase the quantity of their work, while decreasing the quality of their production (Garland, 1973). On the other hand, hourly pay subjects tend to reduce their quantity when 79 faced with an inequitable situation (Pritchard, Dunnette, and Jorgenson, 1972). The research results dealing with the effects of overreward inequity are not as conclusive as predictions dealing with underreward inequity (Friedman and Goodman, 1967; Goodman and Friedman, 1971). The theory predicts that subjects paid on an hourly basis will produce more, or their quality will be better than, their equitably paid counterparts. Piece-rate payment subjects, however, are predicted to produce fewer units than their counterparts, but these units are supposed to be of higher quality. Mitigating circumstances dealing with overreward thresholds and inadequate experimental manipulations have been proposed as potential causes of these mixed results (Goodman and Friedman, 1971). The research discussed above has examined alterations of inputs and outcomes as methods Of inequity reduction. It should be noted that Adams (1965) suggested that leaving the field was another potential consequence of inequity. Several field studies have been conducted, in an underreward context, where the researchers have examined absenteeism and turnover responses. Telley, French, and Scott (1971) attempted to determine whether perceptions of inequity were associated with turnover among hourly employees. Inequity perceptions pertaining to 80 pay, supervision, leadmen, security, advancement, working conditions, intrinsic aspects of the job, and social aspects of the job, were gathered from high-turnover and low-turnover shops. The results supported the theory that inequity perceptions may engender turnover. More specifically, inequity with respect to all the variables specified above, other than pay and advancement, were found tO be related to high-turnover. The authors explained these inconsistent findings by suggesting that union contracts, or other types Of contraining mechanisms, may limit the manner in which inequities are perceived. Propensity for separation and actual separation responses have also been demonstrated. Finn and Lee (1972) carried out a study in the Federal Public Health Service by dividing the sample of professional employees into those that did and did not perceive undercompensation equity. The researchers reported that subjects in the inequity subsample displayed greater dissonance, and less favorable work related attitudes. Moreover, subjects in this subsample were found to be more highly attracted, than the equity subsample, to inducements such as increased salary and Opportunity for more interesting work. These results suggested to the researchers ' that the inequity subsample had a higher propensity for separation than the equity subsample. Similar findings were ‘reported by Patchen (1960) in a study of job and life 81 satisfaction at an Oil refinery. He reported that absences among supervisory employees were related to feelings Of fair treatment toward the promotion policies of the employer. Moreover, absences among the nonsupervisory labor force were related to their attitudes dealing with the perceived fairness of pay. The theory is not sufficiently explicit regarding alternative reactions used by individuals to minimize exposure to inequitable organizational environments. If individuals are unable or choose not to leave the field, they may alter their work related attitudes as a method of dealing with perceived compensation inequity. Rhodes and Steers (1981) conducted the only study which examined the a relationship between pay equity and organizational 1% \ 11-_,fr#~“” commitment. They posited that pay equity is committing because it places constraints on an individual's ability to leave the organization. In a like fashion, if an employee perceives his/her pay as inequitable and is unable to leave the field, then some cognitive readjustment might be engendered in the form of reduced organizational commitment.-// jThe results indicated that pay equity was the most important (variable in explaining organizationalmcommitment in a sample {of producer cooperative employees. In a matched sample of employees working in a conventional organization, however, the same relationship was found to be unimportant. 82 Situational differences were used by the researchers to explain these divergent findings. They contended that worker-owners had higher expectations regarding equitable compensation then workers joining conventional organizations. Thus, they argued that pay equity was the most salient inducement offered the individuals in joining the cooperative. One of the major ambiguities surrounding equity theory deals with the choice of the referent eggrce (Weick, 1966). For the most part, the laboratory studies have not incorporated this facet Of the theory into their experimental designs. This issue is additionally confounded by the variety of potential referents proposed by those who have written about the pay comparison process. Adams (1965) proposed that referent others may be the other party involved in an exchange relationship or another person involved in an exchange with the same third party. Other researchers who have studied the equity process, however, have argued that \internal standards within the individuals are a frequent comparison source (Weick, 1966: Pritchard, 1969). Another view expressed in the literature asserts that individuals employ an external comparison standard when evaluating their economic worth (Jaques, 1961). A related economic perspective posits that individuals test the marketplace to determine whether they are being compensated equitably 83 (Reynolds, 1975). Finally manpower specialists contend that internal labor market comparisons are of utmost importance to the pay comparison process (Doeringer and Piore, 1971). Such a view assumes that individuals spend most Of their work lives moving through an organization's internal job hierarchy. As a consequence, pay comparisons are allegedly limited to those above, below, or at the same job level in the organization. Goodman (1977, 1974) developed a social comparison process model which attempts to clarify, and put into perspective, the diverse views discussed above. He delineated three classes of referents: others, self- standards, and system referents. The others category contains people that can be described as either inside or outside the organization. Inside others can be defined on dimensions such as level, type Of job, or department. Outside others can be differentiated on the basis of work- related, socially-related, or a residual dimension. The self-standard category deals with outcome-input ratios that are unique to the individual but different from his current ratios. Another type of self-referent category is Operationalized in a manner similar to traditional satisfaction measures. More specifically, it is derived from internal concepts Of self worth and thus it involves comparisons of what is versus what should be. System 84 referents are allegedly formed in the exchange between the employee and the organization. When an employee enters an organization certain expectations are deemed to exist regarding the employees' inputs and outputs, and the inducements provided by the organization. These expectations may be explicitly codified in the form of a contract, or implicitly inferred in the employee-employer relationship. Goodman (1977) also posited that the selection of referents is a function of two factors: the availability of information and the relevance or attractiveness of a given referent. Availability Of information is determined by an individual's prOpensity to search the environment for information and position within the organization. The relevance or attractiveness of the referent is primarily dependent upon the instrumentality of the referent in satisfying the needs of an individual. Moreover, the degree of instrumentality is a function of the perceived reliability and validity Of the referent. Goodman (1974) examined the referents used by professional managers in the evaluation Of their pay. Rather than developing an equity index, Goodman tested the validity Of his referent category scheme by relating it to a pay satisfaction index. The results generally supported his conceptual framework, and he concluded the following: (1) individuals use all three types of referents: (2) subjects 85 tended to use multiple referents both within and between the referent categories; (3) the other referent category is typically selected in conjuction with another referent category, but the relative frequency of its selection does not exceed the selection frequency of the self and system referent categories: (4) all three types of referent categories are significantly related to pay satisfaction; and (5) all three referent categories are relatively independent. Other studies have been conducted in an attempt to isolate the referent category used in pay comparison situations, and for the most part, they have partially supported Goodman's (1974) findings. One study (Hill, 1980) examined whether certain types of comparisons tended to covary. The sample was composed Of a broad range of occupational groupings and included unskilled employees as well as professional employees. The data indicates that if individuals make internal comparisons they also make external comparisons. Moreover, the findings suggested that individuals do not use internal self-standards in establishing the equity of their pay. Rather, individuals used the following multiple referents: social referents found in the work environment, referents related to subject's economic needs, referents located in subjects' social networks: and historical pay referents. Another study (Finn and Lee, 1972) divided a sample of professional employees 86 into an equity subsample and an inequity subsample. Although the use of multiple referents was reported, examination of the data disclosed differential reference preferences between subsamples. The equity subsample preferred internal comparisons while the inequity subsample preferred external comparisons. Based on the equity research which has examined the consequences of inequity, and the studies that have been conducted in the area of referent selection, the following compensation related hypotheses can therefore be stated: H9: Organizational commitment is positively related to perceived wage equity when the subjects' employ a self referent. ng: Organizational commitment is positively related to perceived wage equity when the subjects' employ multiple referents. Intent £9 remain. Although the primary focus of this dissertation deals with the antecedents of organizational commitment, a preliminary attempt was made to determine the potential relationship between organizational commitment and intent to remain. The motivational-affective approach to \ \/ fiorganizational commitment suggests that highly committed l 4 employees should be desirous Of working toward organizational gOals. Thus, they should be less likely to leave and should be desirous of remaining with the organization. The studies that have investigated this relationship by using predictive- correlational designs (Koch and Steers, 1978: Mowday, Steers, 87 and Porter, 1979: Steers, 1977) and longitudinal designs (Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian, 1974; Porter, Crampon, and Smith, 1976; Krackhardt, McKenna, Porter, and Smith, 1981) support the above premise. As a consequence, the following intent 39 remain hypothesis can therefore be stated: H11: Organizational commitment is positively related to subjects' intent to remain in the organization. Table 1 summarizes the hypotheses outlined in this portion of this chapter. A pertinent methodological shortcoming in the motivational-affective literature deals with the lack of attention give to the categorical frameworks specified in the studies. Thus, no direct evaluation has ever been made of the relative contribution of each category. In this dissertation, three antecedent categories have been discussed: personal characteristics, work related attitudes, and compensation related attitudes. Previous research, (Steers, 1977; Morris and Sherman, 1981; Stevens, Beyer, and Trice, 1978) which has focused on antecedents nested within categories, suggests that relevant antecedents are not category specific. In other words, antecedents from a variety of categories have been found to be significantly related to organization commitment. 88 TABLE 1 Hypothesized Associations Among the Variables and Organizational Commitment Variable Organizational Commitment Personal Characteristics Age Length of Service (Tenure) Educational Level - ++ Work Related Attitudes Job Involvement Perceived Functional Dependence Perceived Decentralization Perceived Formalization Union Commitment +++++ Compensation Related Attitudes Percevied Wage Equity-Self Referent Perceived Wage Equity-Multiple Referents ++ Behavioral Intention Intent to Remain + 89 An evaluation of the relative contribution of each category was undertaken by employing a hierarchical multiple regression strategy. The nature of this research design requires an ordering of categories in terms of causal priority and/or research relevance (Cohen and Cohen, 1975). By examining the unique variance associated with each antecedent category a determination of relative contribution is possible. The majority of the organizational commitment research has focused on the variables contained in the personal characteristics and work related attitudes categories. Research dealing with the compensation-related attitudes category has not been conducted. As a consequence, the following hypothesis dealing with the potential significance of antecedent categories or sets can therefore be stated: H12: The contribution to organizational commitment variance Of each set or category is significant when the effects of the other blocks are controlled. Cohen and Cohen's (1975) suggested protected "t" test approach for hierarchical multiple regression analysis will be discussed in Chapter IV Of this dissertation. CHAPTER IV METHOD Introduction In chapter IV, the sample and research site are described and the data collection procedure reported. The variables discussed in Chapter III are operationalized and their reliabilities presented. Finally, the method of analysis and the rationale supporting this method are also discussed. Sample and Research Site The sample for this study consisted Of 210 unionized employees, performing nursing related duties, for a county- Owned hospital licensed by the State Of Michigan. The hospital, a 168 bed facility, is located in mid-eastern Michigan. It supports specialities in: internal medicine, gynecology and obstetrics, Ophthalmology, orthopedics, Otolaryngology, mental health, and urology. The subjects in this dissertation belong to two union/associations. The RN unit is organized by the Michigan Nurses Association, and the 90 91 LPN, Orderly, and the Nurses Aid unit is organized by the United Steelworkers Of America. The former unit (MNA) has a total of eighty—seven (87) members, while the latter unit (Steelworkers) has a total membership of one-hundred and twenty-three (123) members. Respectable response rates were realized with seventy-eight percent (78%) Of the MNA unit responding (N=68) and eighty-one percent (81%) of the Steelworkers unit responding (N=l00). Table 2 presents descriptive statistics for the total sample which provides statistics for the combined sample and each bargaining unit. The mean age for the total sample was 36 years with participants in the MNA and the Steelworkers bargaining units reporting similar age characteristics. The mean tenure in the organization for the total sample was 106 months or 9 years. The MNA members had been employed an average of 89 months or 7 years by the hospital, while those belonging to the Steelworkers local averaged 117 months or 10 years. The majority Of the reSpondents were female and married. More specifically 96% of respondents in the total sample were female, while 97% of the MNA respondents and 95% of the Steelworker respondents were female. With respect to marital status, 76% of the total sample were married. In a like fashion, 74% of the MNA respondents reported that they were married, while 78% of the Steelworker respondents indicated that they were married. 92 TABLE 2 Descriptive Statistics for the Total Sample and Each Of the Bargaining Units VARIABLE TOTAL SAMPLE MNA STEELWORKERS Number Of Subjects 168 68 100 Age Mean 36.14 35.98 36.25 Standard Deviation 10.74 10.21 11.13 Tenure in Months Mean 105.89 89.19 117.0 Standard Deviation 92.63 79.4 99.4 Sex Male 7(4%) 2(3%) 5(5%) Female 16l(96%) 66(97%) 95(95%) Marital Status Single 40(24%) l8(27%) 22(22%) Married 128(76%) 50(74%) 78(78%) Educational Level High 109(65%) 66(97%) 43(43%) Medium 58(22%) 2(3%) 36(36%) Low 21(l3%) 0(0%) 21(21%) 93 The subjects did differ with respect to level of educational attainment.1 In the total sample, 65% of the respondents had attained a high educational level, while 22% and 13% respectively achieved medium and low levels Of education. Differences between the two bargaining units with respect to educational level attainment were also reported. Ninty-seven percent (97%) Of the MNA respondents attained a high level of education, while 43% of the Steelworker respondents attained this educational level. These differences are additionally supported by the results reported in the other categories. More specifically, in the medium education category 3% Of the MNA subjects attained this level of education, while 36% of the Steelworker respondents indicated that they had attained the same level. Finally, no MNA subjects indicated that they had received low levels Of education while 21% of the Steelworkers' members did designate this category as their level of educational attainment. Educational differences within and between the bargaining units are understandable in light of specialization differences and certification requirements. Although the education level attainment of MNA respondents is relatively homogeneous, the duties Of a staff nurse differ 1 The manner in which this variable was operationalized is discussed subsequently in of this chapter. 94 significantly from the duties performed by a clinical specialist. Moreover, certification requirements for registered nurses can be attained in a number of different ways. Some registered nurses comply with certification requirements by attending a two year junior college, others may attend a three year nursing program offered by a hospital, while some nurses become accredited by attending an undergraduate university for four years. Those in the undergraduate university category may eventually pursue a graduate degree in nursing. Similar certification and job responsibility differences account for the mixed education level attained by members in the Steelworkers local. For example, a medication licensed practical nurse normally needs to attain a two year junior college degree with additional training required to attain medication certification. On the other hand, a licensed practical nurse can attain certification by attending a two year junior college program, a one year junior college program, or a one year hospital program. For members in the less skilled job classifications, such as ward helpers and house orderlies, a high school diploma will typically fulfill their educational requirements. It should also be noted that subjects did not differ in terms Of ethnic background. Specifically, the total sample and each of the respective bargaining units were composed Of Caucasians. 95 The above analysis should provide sufficient justification for merging the two bargaining units in any subsequent analysis. The bargaining units did not differ significantly on the following descriptive variables: ethnic background, age, tenure, sex, and marital status. They did differ, however, in terms of educational level. This difference was discussed in terms of institutional and certification constraints and does not reflect an inherent bias Of the sample. Data Collection Procedure A structured questionnaire (See Appendix A) was administered, on-site, by a member of the research team during the latter half of 1982. The questionnaire contained questions intended to gather information regarding personal characteristics, work related attitudes and compensation related attitudes. All sampling was by personal presentation of questionnaires to employees by a member of the research team. While the majority of the completed questionnaire were handed back to the researchers at the hospital site, respondents who were unable to complete the questionnaires during the site visit, were asked to complete the questionnaire at home and return the completed questionnaire to a member of the research team. When the questionnaire was presented to the respondents, they were asked to read the instructions on the cover letter 96 attached to the questionnaire. Questions dealing with issues of joint sponsorship and confidentiality were Often addressed. The respondents were told that confidentiality was guaranteed by the research team, and if confidential access to personnel files was not granted, the data collected would still be relevant to the study.2 Although the instructions for the most part were self explanatory, the research team provided specific instructions regarding the perceived wage equity items. A pilot study dealing with these items suggested that specific instructions would be advisable because of their unique format. Since participation in the study was voluntary, true random sampling of the population was infeasible. The adequate response rates, however, seem to indicate that a representative sample was collected for this field study. Operationalization pf Variables In order to test the sufficiency Of the model, measures were secured on the following sets or categories Of variables. It should be noted that all items utilized in this study are presented in Appendix A. Personal characteristics. Measures of personal characteristics included age, tenure in months, and level Of 2 Personnel files access was requested to validate demographic data. Other data contained in the personnel file dealing with absenteeism were collected but not used in this study because they were unreliable. 97 educational attainment. The first two measures are self- explanatory but the coding scheme used in representing level of educational attainment requires additional elaboration. The level of educational attainment scale is a nominal scale which makes a qualitative distinction on the basis of educational attainment. Nominal scales can only be used as independent variables in multiple regression analyses if they are converted into a quantitative representation (Cohen and Cohen, 1975). In this study, dummy variable coding was employed to convert the nominal data into a form compatible with multiple regression analysis. Educational attainment was originally categorized into eleven classifications. These classifications were then categorized into three categories representing high, medium, and low levels of educational attainment. This scheme was selected because a broad range Of plausible responses existed. Again, it should be noted that certification requirements and a variety of educational arrangements necessitated this distinction. Thirteen percent (13%) of the respondents had attained a low level of education. This category consisted Of the following alternatives: grade eight or less, some high school, and completed high school. Twenty-two percent (22%) of the respondents indicated that they had achieved a medium level Of education. This category contained the following alternatives: community college- 98 associate degree, attended college-no degree completed, one year LPN degree-community college or hospital program, and community college degree unrelated to nursing. Sixty-five percent (65%) indicated a level Of educational attainment which placed them in the high category. Alternative responses falling within this category included the following: diploma grad and three year nursing school program, undergraduate university-B.S.N. or other, graduate courses at university, and completed graduate degree-M.S.N. or other. When one undertakes a dummy variable coding research strategy a reference group must be selected for comparison purposes (Cohen and Cohen, 1975). In the present dissertation, the low category was identified as the reference category which resulted in the construction Of two dummy variables. The first variable compared high versus low level respondents, while the second variable compared medium versus low level respondents. Work related attitudes. Perceived work related attitudes were measured using five different instruments. The first instrument assessed the subject's job involvement, which refers to the extent to which the individual psychologically identifies with his or her job. A modified version of a scale developed by Lodahl and Kejner (1965) was used and it contained seven items. Respondents were asked to 99 express extent of agreement or disagreement with each item on a seven-point Likert-type scale, having anchor points labelled from “strongly disagree to strongly agree." This instrument has demonstrated good psychometric properties with reliability estimates ranging from .72 to .89 (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965). In the present study Cronbach's alpha was .75. A number of instruments measured perceived structural influences on organizational commitment. Three aspects Of perceived organizational structure were adopted from a study performed by Morris and Steers (1980). The first instrument examined perceived functional dependence and was measured with a three-item scale. This instrument measured the degree to which the respondent was di ectly dependent upon the work Of others as inputs to and/053ghfluences on his or her own work. Responses to each item were elicited on a seven point Likert-type scale, with verbal anchors ranging from "strongly agree to strongly disagree." Morris and Steers (1980) reported a coefficient alpha Of .73 in their study. Scale reliability (Cronbach Alpha) in the present study was .51. The second instrument examined perceived formalization and was measured with a two-item scale. This instrument measured the extent to which written rules and procedures were available concerning the respondent's job. A seven point Likert-type scale with verbal anchors ranging from “strongly 100 agree to strongly disagree" was also used tO elicit responses. Morris and Steers (1980) did not report reliability data for this measure. In a like fashion, this two item scale did not allow for a reliability determination in the present dissertation. The third, and final instrument assessed perceived decentralization and was measured with a six-item scale. The respondent's degree of participation in decision making was determined by utilizing this scale. Responses to each item were elicited in a manner similar to those described above. A coefficient alpha Of .85 was reported by Morris and Steers (1980). In the present study, Cronbach Alpha reliability was .86. The fifth instrument measured employee union/ association commitment. This instrument was initially developed by Gordon, Philpot, Burt, Thompson, and Spiller (1980), and they reported reliability estimates ranging from .73 to .92. The scale contains thirty-seven items and assesses the following union/association commitment dimensions: union/association loyalty, responsibility to the union/association, and belief in unionism/associationism. Responses to each item were elicited on a seven-point Likert-type scale, with verbal anchors ranging from "strongly agree tO strongly disagree.” Scale reliability or Cronbach's Alpha in the present study was .92. Compensation related attitudes. Perceived wage equity/fairness was evaluated by using a direct-estimate 101 fractionation instrument develOped by Pincus and Reagan (1982). This instrument incorporates critical features Of Adam's (1965) equity theory and Goodman's (1977, 1974) social comparison process model. Torgerson (1958, p.94) has described the fractionation method in the following manner: The logic of the fractionation methods can be stated quite simply: It is assumed that a subject is capable of directly perceiving and reporting the magnitude of a sense-ratio: i.e., the ratio between two subjective magnitudes. This assumption is, of course, subject to tests of internal consistancy. Fractionation methods are found in two general forms. In one form, the subject is presented with two stimuli and instructed to report the subjective ratio between them with respect to the designated attribute. For example, two tones of the sample pitch might be presented to the subject with instructions to report the ratio of loudness Of the first tone to the second. We shall refer to methods that use this approach as direct-estimate methods. Fractionation scales have been prOposed as alternatives to Likert-type measurement instruments because Of their correspondence to the real number system. This characteristic is assumed to Offer a number of advantages (Barnett, Hamlin, and Danowski, 1982). First, fractionation scales maximize the potential variation in the magnitude of a measured attribute. Second, fractionation scales are unbounded, have a true zero point, and possess unlimited density. The latter point suggests that these measurement devices are extremely precise and thus do not build error into the measurement process. Measurement error might 102 result, however, if a respondent assigns the wrong value to the stimulus. Subjects were asked to make wage equity/fairness comparisons by focusing on the following referents: themselves, others in their bargaining unit, others in their counterpart bargaining unit, others performing nursing- related duties in the surrounding area, and others performing nursing related duties around the country. Moreover, subjects were asked to make separate judgments indicating how important the specified referent groups were in their determination of the equity/fairness of their wages. Forced choice judgments were made with the subjects distributing one-hundred points among the various referent groups. Finally, self wage referent and multiple wage referent indices were computed. The self wage referent index was computed by multiplying the importance weight assigned by the respondents to the self referent category with the self referent equity/fairness measure generated via the fractionation method. The identical computational procedure was followed in the development Of the multiple wage referent index. An index was develOped for each of the referent groups and these were then summed into a composite score. It should be noted that the fractionation scales were pilot tested on a comparable group of hospital employees (N = 30) working in Lansing, Michigan. This task was undertaken 103 to ensure that the fractionation scales were readable and understandable. Moreover, the utility of the referent categories was also assessed. Subjects indicated that they were able to make the perceptual distinctions necessitated by the format of the fractionation scales. The dependent variable: Organizational commitment. Employee commitment to the hospital was measured by Porter's Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian, 1974; Mowday, Steers, and Porter, 1979). Porter and his associates characterized organizational commitment on the following factors: (1) a strong belief in and acceptance Of the organization's goals and values; (2) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf Of the organization; and (3) a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization. This questionnaire contains a fifteen- item scale. Respondents were asked to express extent Of agreement or disagreement with each item on a seven-point Likert-type scale, having anchor points labelled from "strongly disagree to strongly disagree." This instrument has demonstrated good psychometric properities, with internal consistency ranging from .82 to .93. In the present study Cronbach's Alpha was .90. The behavioral intention measure: Intent 52 remain. A single item was used to measure the subjects' intent to remain in the organization. This forced choice item asked the 104 subject what was the probability that he/she would quit his/her job, for whatever reason, within the next two years. The alternative response categories ranged from zero percent (0%) - I am absolutely certain that I will not be quitting to one-hundred percent (100%) - I am absolutely certain that I will be quitting. Table 3 presents coefficient alpha reliability estimates for the variables Operationalized in the previous portion of this dissertation. Scales that were not included in Table 3 were deleted because the number of items contained in these scales did not allow for the computation of reliability estimates. Method pf Analysis Two principle methods of data analysis were employed in this dissertation. The first method was a correlational analysis which consists Of a number of procedures. The variables and related hypothesese proposed in Chapter III were analyzed by evaluating a zero-order correlation matrix. Results were interpreted on the basis of their direction, magnitude, and level of significance. Since a determination of the potential relevance of the antecedent categories was one Of the primary research goals of this dissertation separate multiple correlations were run between each of the Coefficient Alpha Reliability Estimates 105 TABLE 3 Variable Level Total Number of Coefficient Sample Items Alpha Estimate Job Involvement 167 7 .75 Perceived Functional Dependence 168 3 .51 Perceived Decentralization 168 6 .86 Union/Association Commitment 168 37 .92 Organizational Commitment 168 15 .90 lfl6 three categories (personal characteristics, work related attitudes, compensation related attitudes) of hypothesized antecedents and organizational commitment. This correlational procedure provided preliminary evidence regarding the relative importance of the three antecedent categories. To determine which category or categories of antecedent variables most strongly influenced organizational commitment, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis by sets or categories was undertaken. Cohen and Cohen's (1975, p.163) protected “t" test approach was utilized, and it contains the following steps: (1) The hierarchical multiple regression proceeds by sets. (2) The contribution of Y variance of each set (or partialled set) is tested for significance at the .05 level by the appropriate standard F test. (3) If the F for a given set is significant, the individual independent variables which make it up are each tested for significance at .65 by means of a standard t test. (4) If the setwise F is not significant, no tests on the set's constituent independent variables are permitted. Overriding this rule removes the protection against large setwise Type I error rates, which is the whole point of the procedure. The general framework discussed by Cohen and Cohen (1975) was fashioned in the following manner to comply with the major goals of this dissertation. First, as a preliminary step, each of the antecedent categories was 167 regressed on organizational commitment. This established the effects of each antecedent category when the other categories were not controlled. Non-significant effects in an uncontrolled condition would suggest that subsequent hierarchical analyses would potentially be unjustified. Second, the next step involved regressing each of the antecedent categories on organizational commitment with each category in turn entering the equation last. This allowed for an estimation of the unique variance associated with each antecedent category. Finally, only those categories which evidenced a significant unique variance were evaluated in terms of the category's constituent independent variables. CHAPTER V RESULTS Introduction Chapter V consists of two major sections. The first section presents correlational analyses of the antecedent variables contained in the heuristic model (see Figure l). Zero-order correlations and multiple correlations are presented in this section of the chapter. The second section consists of hierarchical multiple regression results. Both controlled and uncontrolled conditions are evaluated in an attempt to determine whether antecedent categories provide significant unique variance in their prediction of organizational commitment. Finally, the categories constituent independent variables are analyzed if a given category provides unique variance. The Correlational Analyses Table 4 presents the zero-order correlations for variables contained in the heuristic model depicted in Figure 1. All of the reported correlations are in the predicted 108 flea. v m #1. HQ. v m «c ma. v m a new a z umvddofim nu «a. Na. ..mu. cma. NH. voa. ayma. vs. ma.I «cod. .ma. cccmm. «may Canavm ou Havana II «aamm. Nu. «..om. Ha.l no.3 nod. Ha. ca.l Ha. Ha. ca¢mm. “adv acououox uamduasz thawsvm mmmz 00>fiooumm In no. mo. Nao.| ma.l and. Ne. QH.I chm. am. «cum. Addy unouwuum uaww thuasum omoz oo>woouom II no. NH. HA. naa.l ccmH.| oa.n «ma. NH. «mu. Ana. unoEquEOU saws: In NH. mm. mQ.I no.| me. no. NH. cathm. Amy :oHunuHHuEuom cu>woouma ll AH. coma. ma. HH.I scam. .VH. «C‘Hv. Amy COAHONM Iamuucmooo cu>aoouom OJ II me. «cam. 58.: vs. 60H. me. «by vocuccumoo 0 auscuuucsm ou>wuuuom .1 II oa.n 5a.: «can. «ccmu. accuv. “my unoEm>HocH non II ¢¢cmn.c coa.l HQ.I va.t Amy ao>0q 304 .a> ~o>0q Esficuz It Na.| NH.I no.1 Av. Ho>oq 304 .u> Hm>oq cmw: unmanacuu< Ho>oq newuoosou II «atmh. scamm. An. Ouscwh II cccmm. any mad I: A". u:o&u«EEOU macawuouacomuo ma «A Ad an m m h o n v n N a uoannwuo> H000: owunwuamm on» an cosauucoo «mannaun> nah occauououuou MucuOIOuou v wanna 110 direction. The magnitude of the relationships and their level of significance, however, do differ within and between antecedent categories. Within the personal characteristics category, age (r = .35, p < .001) and tenure in the organization (r = .39, p < .001) were significantly related to organizational commitment. Age and tenure in the organization were also significantly correlated (r = .72, p < .001). Thus, to minimize potential multicolinearity, the age variable was eliminated from all subsequent analyses. Both educational attainment variables were not significantly related to organizational commitment (high level vs. low level, r = —.07; medium level vs. low level, r = -.04). Also, in terms of signficance, these variables did not achieve an apprOpriate level of significance (p < .05). For the most part, variables nested within the work related attitudes category evidenced statistically significant relationships with organizational commitment. More specifically, in terms of correlational magnitude and significance level, both job involvement (r = .41, p < .001) and perceived decentralization (r = .41, p < .001) had the strongest relationship with organizational commitment. Perceived formalization evidenced similar results (r = .39, p < .001), but perceived functional dependence was not found to be significantly related to organizational commitment (r = 111 .05, p > .05). Finally, union commitment was marginally, but significantly, related to organizational commitment (r = .15, p < .05). Variables contained in the compensation related attitudes category were also significantly related to organizational commitment. The multiple referent variable had a larger and more significant relationship (r = .28, p < .001), however, than its self referent counterpart (r = .22, p < .01). Although these variables were significantly related (r = .39, p < .001), the relationship was not of sufficient magnitude to warrant the exclusion of one variable on multicolinearity grounds. The behavioral intention measure, intent to remain in the organization, was also significantly related to organizational commitment (r = .25, p < .001). The multiple correlations presented in Table 5 provide support for the notion that all three sets of antecedent categories may be relevant contributors to organizational commitment. More specifically, all three categories were significantly related to organizational commitment. Work related attitudes, however, are the strongest predictors of organizational commitment (r = .64, p < .001) followed by personal characteristics (r = .40, p < .001) and compensation related attitudes (r = .32, p < .001). 112 Table 5 Multiple Correlations Between Antecedent Categories and Organizational Commitment Antecedent Multiple Category Correlation F-Value Personal Characteristics .40 10.32*** Work Related Attitudes .64 22.09*** Compensation Related Attitudes .32 9.32*** N = 165, df = 3,161 for personal characteristics; df = 5,159 for work related attitudes; df = 2,162 for compensation related attitudes. *** p < .001 113 The Hierarchical Regression Analyses Two related, but distinct, hierarchial analyses were employed in an attempt to determine the potential effects of the antecedent categories. The first analysis evaluated the antecedent categories in an uncontrolled condition. Thus, the potential effect of the antecedent categories was assessed without prior partialling of any antecedent categories. The second analysis controlled the effects of the other categories, thus allowing for a determination of the unique variance associated with each antecedent category. If the former analysis indicated that uncontrolled categories did not significantly impact organizational commitment, then a unique variance analysis would be unnecessary. Table 6 presents both uncontrolled and controlled hierarchical regression results. With respect to the uncontrolled findings, the simultaneous hierarchical regression analysis, which combines all three antecedent categories, indicated that the entire set of antecedent categories accounted for a significant proportion of the variance in organizational commitment (R2 = .49, p < .001). This result suggested that the variables contained in the heuristic model reasonably captured the domain of potential organizational commitment antecedents. 114 Table 6 Hierarchial Regression Results of Personal Characteristics (PC), Work Related Attitudes (WR), and Compensation Related Attitudes (CR) on Organizational Commitment Type of Analysis R2-Value Source Error F—Value df df Uncontrolleda PC, WR, CR Combined .49 10 154 l4.78*** PC .16 3 161 l0.32*** WR .41 5 159 22.09*** CR .10 2 162 9.32*** Controlledb PC .05 3 154 4.60** WR .26 5 154 15.83*** CR .02 2 154 3.75* Note: N = 165 a Effects of other blocks uncontrolled. b Effects of other blocks controlled and thus reflect unique variance. p < .05 p < .01 p< * *** .001 115 Each of the separate uncontrolled predictor categories accounted for significant and substantial portions of the total variance in organizational commitment. The work related attitudes category accounted for the greatest degree of variance (R2 = .41, p < .001), followed by the personal characteristics category (R2 = .16, p < .001), which in turn was followed by the compensation related attitudes category (R2 = .10, p < .001). These results for the separate uncontrolled categories provided preliminary support for the unique variance analyses which follow. The unique variance analyses support the hypothesis that the contribution to organizational commitment variance of each set or category is significant when the effects of the other categories are controlled. For each of the analyses, the category of interest was entered into the regression equation after the influence of the other categories was partialled out. The results reported in Table 6, however, indicated that the categories provided a dissimilar degrees of significant increments in unique variance for organizational commitment. More specifically, the work related attitudes category provided the greatest amount of unique variance (R2 = .26, p < .001), followed by the personal characteristics category (R2 = .05, p < .01). Finally, the compensation related attitudes category provided the least amount of unique 116 variance and achieved the lowest level of significance (R2 = .02, p < .05). Since each antecedent category accounted for some level of unique variance in organizational commitment, the results presented in Table 6 do not support the notion that a given category mediates the relationship of another category and organizational commitment. This mediation hypothesis would have been supported if each antecedent category would have failed to significantly increase the amount of variance explained in the dependent variable beyond that accounted for by the other antecedent categories. For example, if the work related attitudes category would have failed to account for unique variance in organizational commitment, then we could infer that the relationship between work related attitudes and organizational commitment was mediated by the personal characteristics and/or the compensation related attitudes categories. The unique variance results provided justification for the evaluation of the antecedent variables nested within each category. This research strategy complied with the protected "t“ test approach suggested by Cohen and Cohen (1975). It protects the significance tests associated with the antecedent variables against inflated setwise Type I error rates by requiring that the F test of each antecedent category be significant at a specified level. By minimizing 117 the potential for Type I error, the statistical tests are assumed to be relatively powerful. Table 7 presents multiple regression results for the antecedent variables nested within categories with sigificant unique variance. With respect to the personal characteristics category, tenure in the organization emerged as the sole significant predictor of organizational commitment (p < .001). Both of the educational attainment dummy variables were not significantly related to organizational commitment. Within the work related attitudes category, a number of variables emerged as significant independent predictors of organizational commitment. Job involvement positively and significantly influenced organizational commitment (p < .001). Two perceived structural characteristics, perceived decentralization and perceived formalization, also emerged as highly significant predictors of organizational commitment (p < .001). Perceived functional dependence, however, failed to make a significant (p > .05) unique contribution to the variation explained in organizational commitment. Lastly, union commitment did not significantly influence organizational commitment. Results in Table 7 also indicate that neither of the antecedent variables nested within the compensation related attitudes category were significantly (p > .05) related to 118 Table 7 Results of Hierarchical Regression Analyses For Antecedent Variables Nested Within Categories with Significant Unique Variance Category and Antecedent Variables Beta F-Value Personal Characteristics Tenure .037 13.75*** Education Level High vs low level of education 1.14 .13 Medium vs low level of education 1.83 .39 Work Related Attitudes Job Involvement .71 16.59*** Perceived Functional Dependence -.30 1.07 Perceived Decentralization .44 14.07*** Perceived Formalization 1.77 23.72*** Union/Association Commitment .04 1.54 Compensation Related Attitudes Perceived Wage Equity-Self Referent .0007 2.19 Perceived Wage Equity-Multiple Referent .0007 2.42 Note: N = 165, df = 3,154 for personal characteristics; df = 5,154 for work related attitudes; df = 2,154 for compensation related attitudes. *** p < .001 119 organizational commitment. These findings are surprising in light of the unique variance results which revealed a significant, yet moderate increment in unique variance for organizational commitment (R2 = .02, p < .05). Taken together, these results indicate that the perceived wage equity variables as a category significantly influenced organizational commitment. On an individual basis, however, they did not prossess a sufficient degree of independent influence. Some combination of the perceived wage equity variables probably led to the unique variance contribution of the compensation related attitudes category. CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION Introduction In this final chapter of the dissertation, the limitations of the study are specified and the findings reported in Chapter V are discussed in terms of the hypotheses and the literature review. Moreover, the practical implications of the findings regarding our understanding of the organizational commitment process are also included, as well as directions for future research. Limitations The research presented in the dissertation should be scrutinized in light of several limiting conditions which might reduce the generalizability of the results. The first, and perhaps the foremost concern, deals with the nature and characteristics of the research sample. The majority of the respondents were of the female gender. This condition might have biased the results because it has been found that gender tends to be related to organizational commitment. Studies by 120 121 several researchers (Grusky, 1966; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972) have revealed that women as a group tend to be more organizationally committed then men. This potential bias has been explained by emphasizing the cultural barriers that women in organizations face, and that overcoming these barriers engenders an added degree of importance to organizational membership (Grusky, 1966). The nature of the initiation rites which female nurses confront in hospital settings may not be as severe as those confronted by females employed in other sectors of the economy. The respondents' semi-professional status and their working relationships with a predominately male administrative hierarchy, however, may lead to role stress. This role stress might overly influence the behavioral commitment of females performing nursing related duties in a hospital setting. A second, and related limitation, concerns the collection of data in a single unionized setting consisting of two bargaining units. Any study conducted in an isolated setting faces certain generalizability limitations. That is, contextual and structural characteristics of the hospital may engender certain functional interrelationships among the antecedent variables specified in the heuristic model. These characteristics may be so setting specific that certain sets of phenomena may interrelate with organizational commitment in a configuration that is relatively dependent on these 122 characteristics. For example, the research site was situated in a highly unionized community. This contextual or environmental factor may impact the relative wages, employment, welfare, and attitudes of those individuals living in this labor market and working in the hospital. Typically, generalizability issues are minimized by gathering comparable data across research settings. By doing so, data can be gathered which are relatively independent of contextual, anatomical, or operational differences between settings. Unfortunately, a multi-setting research sample was not employed in this study. A third limitation deals with the merging of the two bargaining units into one combined sample. In a previous chapter, examination of demographic characteristics disclosed relative homogeneity between both bargaining units (see Table 2). The two bargaining units, however, may potentially differ with respect to their collective bargaining ideologies. The Steelworkers Union was in the vanguard of the industrial union revolution which took place in the 1930's. It is an industrial union whose philosophies and bargaining structure follow the classic, or traditional, union model. Moreover, the union evolved from an initially combative strike-prone posture to one which became more collaborative (Barbash, 1980). Recently, employee-employer relationships 123 have become more antagonistic because of major divestitures and an influx of foreign imports. Regardless of the time period, however, there have always been clear distinctions between management rights and employee requirements. Issues dealing with job security, benefits, and wages are typically of primary importance to industrial unions. These bargaining goals are as equally cogent for Steelworker members employed in a hospital setting as those employed by a steel mill. Although the bargaining goals of the Steelworkers and Michigan Nursing Association (MNA) bargaining units may at times be similar, their views toward unionism and collective bargaining are dissimilar. It is interesting to note that both the American Nurses Association (ANA) and its affiliate the Michigan Nurses Association (MNA) do not view themselves as unions. This philosophy permeates both institutional and individual attitudes toward collective bargaining. On an institutional level of analysis, the ANA's leadership has historically perceived collective bargaining as a supplement to more basic programs dealing with the nursing arts and the professionalization of the nursing occupational classification (Kruger, 1961). This outlook is partially reinforced by the relative homogeneity of their constituency which consists of highly skilled Registered Nurses. Also, collective bargaining is viewed as a necessary device employed by less skilled, or non-professional, 124 individuals performing nursing related duties such as LPN's and orderlies. The uncertainty and confusion regarding the relationship between the nursing profession and collective bargaining is also confounded by the dual role held by the ANA's leadership (Miller, 1980). The leadership of the ANA is often composed of nursing administrators and educators who may consider collective bargaining as a threat to their managerial positions. A comparable conflict exists at the state association level. Officers at this level are frequently employed as nursing supervisors and/or administrators of hospitals, and yet they may be tacitly involved in the fashioning of collective bargaining strategy. These institutional conditions are also manifested by the attitudes of some nurses toward collective bargaining (Hopping, 1976; Jacox, 1971). Nurses often view collective bargaining as "unladylike" because it may require striking, picketing, and other forms of concerted activity. Moreover, the nurse's historical role as a mother-surrogate may often conflict with her role as a bargaining unit member because concerted activity may pose a threat to the safety of patients (McEvoy, 1975). The above institutional and individual differences might have biased the results. Also, the merging of the two bargaining units might have masked the potential influence of union/association commitment on organizational commitment. 125 A fourth limitation deals with the Likert-type scales employed in the study. The majority of the attitudinal measures had a common Likert scale format. Although items within various scales were reverse coded, a response set might have been engendered by using this scaling approach. This condition could have affected the reliability of these measures. A fifth limitation concerns the sample size employed in this study. Statistical power reflects the ability to detect the true population effect the power of a statistical test is enhanced as the sample size increases (Cohen and Cohen, 1975). While the total sample consisted of 168 respondents, power considerations restricted the number of variables evaluated in the multiple regression analyses. The above mentioned sample size limitation prevented the analysis of some variables incorporated in other multivariate studies of the organizational commitment construct. For example, job characteristics (Steers, 1977), role conflict and role ambiguity (Morris and Sherman, 1981), performance in promotion and technical skill in promotion (Stevens, Beyer, Trice, 1978) were not contained in the model. Thus, this study is not a direct replication of the other multivariate studies. A sixth limitation deals with the potential truncation of the organizational commitment measure. Since data were 126 not solicited from employees who had departed from the organization, the data that were gathered might be truncated in a positive direction. A seventh limitation relates to the reliability of certain variables. The fractionation scales used in this study were not amenable to reliability computations. Thus, the nonsignificance of the compensation antecedent variables may be the result of scale reliability inadequacies. Similar deficiencies exist with two of the structural variables. The perceived formalization variable consisted of two items, and thus, reliability computations were not possible. The significant influence of this variable may, therefore, be questioned on psychometric grounds. Moreover, the nonsignificance of the perceived functional dependence variable may also be the result of the scale's low reliability. Overall, the limitations described above do not severely restrict either the validity or the generalizability of the results. They do, however, emphasize aspects of the present research design which could be improved in subsequent investigations. Discussion This study attempted to develop a multivariate model of organizational commitment that was grounded in the 127 motivational-affective framework developed by Steers (1977). In general, the results provided sufficient evidence for the utility of Steer's theoretical framework as a guide to identifying potential influences on organizational commitment. The present study, however, extended the research conducted by Steers (1977) and others (Morris and Sherman, 1981; Stevens, Beyers, and Trice, 1978) because the statistical relevance of antecedent categories was analyzed prior to an analysis of specific antecedent variables. This analytic distinction is of importance because researchers have disagreed about the relative importance of certain antecedent categories. Some researchers (Morris and Sherman, 1981; Steers, 1977) have alleged that a variety of antecedent categories constitute important influences on organizational commitment, while others (Stevens, Beyers, and Trice, 1978) have contended that role related variables are the more important predictors. For a number of reasons, attempts to reconcile these divergent points of view are quite difficult. First, comparisons are complicated because of differences among the sets of antecedent categories and predictor variables in the various multivariate studies. For example, one study (Steers, 1977) investigated three sets of antecedent categories (personal characteristics, job characteristics, and work experiences), while another study (Stevens, Beyer, and Trice, 1978) examined two categories 128 (role and personal variables). Second, and of utmost import, these researchers proferred conclusions regarding the relative influence of the antecedent categories without performing a statistical analysis. They reviewed the results pertaining to individual antecedent variables and used them to generate conclusions regarding the influence of antecedent categories. Several important conclusions emerge from the findings of the present study. The multiple correlation and the hierarchical multiple regression results indicate that all three sets of antecedents significantly influence organizational commitment. These results provide strong support for the multidimensional stance advocated by the motivational-affective scholars (Porter, Crampon, and Smith, 1976; Steers, 1977). By incorporating important aspects of the calculative-rational (Becker, 1960) and the social- psychological approaches (Kiesler, 1971) this approach seems to capture the complexities of the commitment process. Moreover, the motivational-affective, multidimensional approach seems more realistic than the other approaches which focus on singular aspects of commitment, which seem far too simplistic. The work-related attitudes category provided the greatest amount of unique variance, and was the most significant positive influence on organizational commitment. 129 This result supports studies which have identified different facets of work contexts as important determinants of organizational commitment (Buchanan, 1974a, b; Hall, Schneider, and Nygren, 1972; Steers, 1977; Stebbins, 1971). This finding also supports the notion that social structural linkages may induce organizational commitment (Morris and Steers, 1980; Becker, 1960; Sheldon, 1971). Within the work—related attitudes category, both perceived formalization and perceived decentralization significantly influenced organizational commitment, while perceived functional dependence did not. Thus, employees performing nursing related duties tended to perceive their jobs as highly saturated with written rules and procedures concerning their responsibilities, participatory with respect to decision making, and not directly dependent upon the work of others in terms of influences and/or relevant inputs (Morris and Steers, 1980). These divergent findings can be explained by examining the caste-like system that characterizes most hospital settings. This system encourages a social stratification within hospitals that is based on the harnessing and guardianship of knowledge (Katz, 1969). The major objective of hospitals is the harnessing of scientific and nonscientific resources for the care and the treatment of client groups. Doctors are viewed as the scientific resource 130 because they are the primary guardians of knowledge. One nonscientific resource, the registered nurse, in turn, rationally employs this knowledge by translating it into working orders for other nonscientific resources, the LPN's, orderlies, and aides. Although those performing nursing related duties do not make major policy decisions concerning the treatment of patients, day-by-day ward life is ruled by these individuals within their own segmented occupational domains. The social stratification process is structurally reinforced by a system of written rules and procedures which formalizes the jobs of employees working in a hospital. Some of these procedures are contrived for legal purposes and necessitate a tremendous amount of daily documentation. Other rules and procedures are develOped to enhance patient care by improving the communication, and thus the efficiency of Operations from shift to shift. Lastly, in an organized hospital setting, the collective bargaining agreement contains clauses dealing with work rules and specific job classifications which also add to the perceptions of formalization. These formalization mechanisms may, therefore, influence organizational commitment by facilitating a certain amount of job clarity. By definition, highly committed employees are willing to exert a considerable amount of effort to 131 accomplish certain organizational goals (Mowday, Steers, and Porter, 1979). Thus, the existence of a highly formalized system of rules and procedures may enhance an employee's ability to determine which methods should be used to achieve these goals. Social stratification and the collective bargaining agreement may engender permanent buffers between the levels of a hospital's organizational hierarchy, but it may also enhance decision making and independence within the various strata. For example, Registered Nurses may assign duties to others performing nursing-related functions in the hospital. Performance of these responsibilities, however, may involve a participative decision-making approach at the lower levels of the hierarchy. Thus, perceived decentralization may influence organizational commitment because employees are more ego-involved in their work and work-related outcomes. Social stratification may also encourage strata independence and a perception by its members that their efficiencies are not dependent on the work performed by others. Although the bargaining units have similar community of interests, perceptions of independence may also be fostered by labor legislation which precludes the merger of the two bargaining units. These conditions might explain the nonsignificant influence of perceived functional dependence on organizational commitment. Some may view them as 132 dysfunctional from an efficiency and commitment standpoint. They may, however, be unavoidable consequences of an organization segmented by social stratification and the collective bargaining process. A major theoretical extension proposed in this study dealt with the potential influence of union/association commitment on organizational commitment. This variable was not found to be an important influence on organizational commitment. It is reasonable to suppose, however, that the influence of union/association commitment on organizational commitment may be effected by a number of variables not specified in the model. First, the existing labor relations climate within an organization might differentially impact the above relationship (Katz, 1949; Stagnar, 1954). For example, an employee might not be committed to his/her union/association but the labor relations climate may be so volatile that it may dampen an employee's organizational commitment. Second, the behavioral involvement of union/association members in the operation of their local labor organization might also effect the relationship (Dean, 1954). Thus, the degree of union/association participation may enhance or dampen union/association commitment, which in turn, might influence organizational commitment. Finally, individuals performing nursing related functions fall within the murky realm of the semi-professional (Etzioni, 1971). 133 This is especially true of Registered Nurses and Licensed Practical Nurses. Professional status requires training, legitimized status, right to privileged information, guardianship of a body of knowledge, and autonomy from supervision (Katz, 1969; Etzioni, 1971). As yet a number of these criteria have not been realized by employees performing nursing related duties. Aspirations for professional status, however, are especially high among Registered Nurses because of the goals of the American Nurses Association (Miller, 1980). Other employees have similar aspirations because they resent the notion that their only alternative is non-professional status (Etzioni, 1971). Thus, an employee performing nursing-related duties in an organized hospital may be faced with multiple allegiance concerns. These allegiances or commitments may involve three related but unique reference groups: the union/association, the organization, and the profession. As a consequence multiple allegiances may influence the degree of organizational commitment. Another consistent finding within the work-related attitudes category was that job involvement was a positive influence on organizational commitment. This result supports the rational-calculative view of the commitment process (Becker, 1960). Job involvement has been traditionally Operationalized as the degree to which an employee's 134 self-esteem is affected by his work performance (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965). It can, therefore, be assumed that employees very involved in their job accrue side-bet investments resulting from services which they provide at the hospital (Becker, 1960). Since the hospital provides employees with an opportunity to act out “internalized values about the goodness of work" (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965, p.24), employees may tend to become organizationally committed. The personal characteristics category also contributed a significant increment of unique variance for organizational commitment. Again, this result supports Becker's (1960) contention that commitments to an organization are influenced strongly by side-bets, which are accrued extrinsic benefits that would be lost if membership in the organization was terminated. Analysis of the variables nested within this category indicates that tenure in the organization is an important extrinsic determinant of organizational commitment. Therefore, the costs associated with leaving the organization tend to increase the longer one stays with the organization (Sheldon, 1971; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972). As costs increase, commitment to the hospital should rise as well. The educational attainment dummy variables, however, did not significantly influence organizational commitment. The manner in which these variables were operationalized might have led to these findings. If these variables had been 135 Operationalized in a more traditional manner, such as years of educational experience, the results might have confirmed findings reported by other researchers (Koch and Steers, 1976; Sheldon, 1971). Another theoretical extension proposed in this study concerned the potential influence of compensation related attitudes on organizational commitment. The results indicate some support for this relationship but they are somewhat inconclusive. More specially, the categorical analysis indicated that this category contributed a significant increment of unique variance, while neither of the attitudinal measures significantly influenced organizational commitment. These divergent results lend support to the protected “t“ test approach advocated by Cohen and Cohen (1975). If a simultaneous multiple regression analysis had been conducted, which is the traditional approach (Steers, 1977; Stevens, Beyers, and Trice, 1978; Morris and Steers, 1980; Morris and Sherman, 1981), the potential relevance of this category would have been masked. Also, the results indicate that fractionation scales (Barnett, Hamlin, and Danowksi, 1982) may be a viable measurement technique for the collection of equity data in organizational settings (Pincus and Reagan, 1982). The categorical compensation results also imply that the existence of pay equity fosters commitment in that it places 136 constraints on an individual's ability to leave the organization. Once again aspects of the calculative-rational approach (Becker, 1960; Homans, 1961) seem to be supported. Employee-employer relationships are heavily vested with exchange transactions. The weekly compensation provided by an employer for services rendered is probably the most salient transaction which takes place on an ongoing basis. Over a given period of time, employees may perceive the outcome of these exchanges as investments in the organization, which may lead to organizational commitment. The instrumental basis for an activity as a potential influence on organizational commitment has at times been de-emphasized because of the emphasis placed on intrinsic job features (Salancik, l977a; Buchanan, 1974a). A research bias seems to exist whereby employee attachments resulting from personal outcomes are considered less important than the felt responsibility engendered by intrinsic job features. A research design which solely emphasizes either instrumental or intrinsic job features may not properly assess the dynamics of the organizational commitment process. The nonsignificance of the antecedent compensation variables may be a function of several conditions. The procedures used to generate the equity/fairness indices restricted the respondents' responses because judgments dealing with pay equity were the focal point of the analysis. 137 Other components of the compensation package might have been viewed as more salient by the respondents but they were not provided with an opportunity to express these judgments. The procedures also specified the referent other categories for the respondents. This specification could have excluded certain referent groups deemed more important by the respondents when making equity/fairness comparisons (Goodman, 1977). The organizational commitment measure used in the present study was developed by scholars advocating a psychological or a motivational—affective view of organizational commitment (Steers, 1977; Porter and Smith, 1970). This approach describes commitment as an active and positive orientation toward the organization, and as such, it reflects a form of value commitment (Stebbins, 1971). Exchange approaches, however, view commitment as an outcome of inducement contribution transactions between the organization and its employees. They emphasize the instrumentalities of membership and the more favorable the exchange from an employee's perspective the greater the commitment to the organization (Ritzer and Trice, 1969; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972). Under this approach continuance or calculative commitment (Kanter, 1968; Etzioni, 1975) within utilitarian organizations is of primary importance. Thus, when one evaluates the potential influence of 138 instrumental job features on organizational commitment both conceptualizations should be incorporated into the model. Instrumental features may differentially impact an employee's value and continuance commitment predispositions. The influence of the antecedent compensation variables might have been additionally dampened because of the union/association contract. The collective bargaining agreement between the parties contains clauses dealing with compensation related topics. Progession between and within salary grades, however, is a function of seniority and not merit. Thus, some terms and conditions may act as constraining structures, which may minimize certain types of perceived inequities, as long as the underlying assumptions are accepted as given (Telly, French, and Scott, 1971). Practical Implications Organizational commitment requires an integration of individual and organizational goals and values. It requires that employees perceive a felt responsibility for their jobs and a felt responsibility of what is happening in and to their organization. The employer has certain responsibilities that must be addressed as well. The employing organization must perceive its employees as valuable human resources which can provide relevant input concerning the improvement of organizational operations. The 139 results dealing with work—related attitudes reinforce this notion. The above goal, however, is difficult to achieve in an organizational environment heavily burdened by diverse social stratification mechanisms. Mechanisms which have their genesis in the collective bargaining arena and the knowledge- harnessing philosophies held by hospital administrators and physicians. These structural and attitudinal predispositions are extremely resilient because they are a function of societal expectations, economic conditions, and institutional prejudices. Part of the culture within an organization can be changed, however, without altering existing authority relationships, management rights, or union/association rights. This can be accomplished by establishing an employee involvement program which would solicit inputs from actors in the employee-employer relationship. Relevant dialogue and pertinent information concerning the status of the organization would enable an employee to see how his/her job impacts the broader organization. Execution of employee suggestions would enhance an employee's feeling of being personally responsible for the quality of his/her contribution to the organization. Such a process should increase an employee's job involvement and perceived participation in decision making (perceived decentralization). 140 If the membership of the employee involvement program represented a cross section of the organization and union/association hierarchies, then perceived functional dependence should also be enhanced. Discussions taking place within the program should facilitate work integration among the various strata. As members gain a better understanding of the concerns held by different factions within the organization, a certain cohesiveness should develop transforming the perspective held by all individuals within the organization from “me" to ”we." The social stratification issue is particularly perplexing to those employees within the Registered Nurse job classification. These individuals are potentially torn between their professional aspirations and their formal role within the organization. If a nurse's role was re-focused so that she would become the manager of patient care, her professional contribution would be more fully recognized (Katz, 1969). Such a role reaffirmation should increase the nurse's job involvement, and felt responsibility, which should lead to enhanced organizational commitment. The social psychological notion of behavioral commitment (Salancik, l977a) has potential bearing on the tentative results dealing with the compensation-related attitudes category. If employees are given an opportunity to perform behavorial acts, the potential allegedly exists for greater 141 employee commitment. Organizations could offer cafeteria benefit plans which would allow an employee to fashion his/her benefit package. The selection of individualized benefits could result in behavioral commitment. Although compensation plans based on merit rather than seniority might be difficult to effectuate in a unionized setting, this might also stimulate behavioral commitment. The setting of performance goals and their subsequent accomplishment could be committing because they would be unequivocal, difficult to change, and observable (Salancik, l977a). Directions for Future Research A large number of studies dealing with the topic of organizational commitment have been summarized in this dissertation. Several areas of future research need to be discussed because they appear important for our understanding of the organizational commitment process. Although a number of studies have determined that social integration is an important determinant of organizational commitment, there is minimal consensus on either operational or conceptual definitions of integration. Some researchers have asked respondents to report frequency of contact (Antonovsky and Antonovsky, 1974; Sheldon, 1971), others have used job or work descriptions which equate social interaction with social integration, when they in fact measure 142 opportunities for integration (Morris and Steers, 1980). Thus, a distinction needs to be made between work contexts which encourage social integration and social integration itself. It would, therefore, be more useful to incorporate into future research designs both direct and indirect social integration measures. A direct measure of social integration could be gathered by conducting a communication network analysis which would provide a direct measure of communication activity. Integration into different types of networks could also have potentially different implications for various theoretical perspectives involving organizational commitment. The present study, among other goals, attempted to evaluate the influence of union/association commitment on organizational commitment. The potential number of committing sources are quite numerous and may differentially impact an employee's organizational commitment. The role conflicts which these objects of commitment may engender are increasingly important because of the diverse pressures being placed on employees within organizations. These related issues represent an important area for future research. Another question of some importance concerns the interactive effect of commitment antecedents. Such an analysis would be useful because it may reveal more 143 complicated effects than have been detected thus far. An empirical examination which incorporated interactive effects, however, would require additional theoretical development of the commitment construct. Without such guidance, interpretation of results would be quite difficult. Another potentially important area for future inquiry is the use of path analysis to investigate a comprehensive theory of organizational commitment. The multidimentional studies which have been conducted seem to indicate that organizational commitment may be composed of multiple determinants. Some of these variables may be causally or temporally antecedent to others. For example, an employee's personal characteristics may predispose his/her perceptions of different job facets which might influence the degree of organizational commitment. The majority of the studies reviewed in this dissertation have been cross-sectional in design. These studies serve a useful purpose because they help our understanding of the construct by surfacing the types of variables which might influence organizational commitment. They do not, however, provide sufficient information concerning the commitment process. Additional longitudinal studies which study the commitment process over time are necessary if we intend to increase our understanding of the commitment process. 144 All of the studies reviewed in this study, and especially, the research conducted by the motivational- affective scholars, place an emphasis on the antecedents of organizational commitment. Studies need to be undertaken, however, which evaluate the construct validity of organizational commitment. This notion is of particular import in light of the divergent theories employed by researchers to investigate the phenomenon. Scales need to be developed which incorporate both continuance and value commitment philosophies. It may be the case that antecedent variables differentially impact alternative organizational commitment conceptualizations. APPENDICES APPENDIX APPENDIX A YOUR UNION/ASSOCIATION AND YOUR JOB November, 1982 Dear MNA and USW’Local Member: The study in which you are about to participate is designed to determine your attitudes toward your Union/Association and your job. The leadership of the MNA, USW - Local and the Hospital support this study. They feel that the study will help them understand your attitudes toward your job and the services which your Union/Association provides. Because part of the project involves certain statistical analyses, it is necessary for us to request your name and a signed waiver releasing your personnel file. No one at the Hospital, the Union, nor the Association will see any of the completed questionnaires or the personnel materials. Only members of the MSU research team will see the questionnaires and the personnel materials and they will immediately convert names to numbers. The leadership of MNA, USW, and the Hospital have agreed to this arrangement. The MSU research team guarantees that these pledges will be honored. A survey of this kind can only be as good as the cooperation given by the participants. Each question should be answered completely. We urge you to give each question your most thoughtful, careful consideration and accurate response. If you participate in this study and would allow the MSU research team confidential access to your personnel file, please print your name, position, and date. Name Position Date Thank you very much for your cooperation and assistance. Sincerely, David M. Pincus MSU Research Team, Project Director [—4 uh U‘l 146 We would like to ask you some specific questions about you and your job at the Hospital. Please circle or fill in the appropriate responses 1. What union/association are you a member of? 1. Michigan Nurses Association 2. United Steelworkers of America How long have you worked at the Hospital? years How old are you? years What is your sex? 1. Male 2. Female What is your ethnic background? 1. Black 4. American Indian 2. Caucasian 5. Asian 3. Hispanic 6. Other What is your marital status? 1. Single 2. Married What is your level of education? 1. Grade eight or less 2. Some high school . Completed high school . 1 year LPN community college or hospital LPN program Community college - Associate degree Community college degree unrelated to nursing Diploma grad (three-year nursing school proqram) 8. Attended college - no degree completed 9. Undergraduate university (B.S.N. or other) \IO‘U‘I AU.) 0 10. Graduate courses at university 11. Completed graduate degree (M.S.N. or other) Below are several statements dealing with possible feelings that an individual might have about the union/association which he/she belongs to. We would like you to indicate the degree to which you Agree or Disa ree with each statement by circling the appropriate number. Please be honest; your answer will be kept in the strictest of confidence. 147 TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE Strongly Disagree Disagree Slightly Disagree 9' Neither m Slightly H N 1. I feel a sense of pride being a part of this union/ association. 2. Based on what I know now and l 2 what I can expect in the future, I plan to be a member of the union/association the rest of the time I work for the Hospital. 3. The record of this union/ 1 2 association is a good example of what dedicated people can get done. 4. The union/association's l 2 problems are my problems. 5. Even though he/she may not 1 2 like parts of it, the union/ association member must "live up to" all terms of the Articles of Agreement. 6. The only reason I belong to l 2 the union/association is to make sure I get promotions or transfers of job assign- ment. 7. My loyalty is to my work, 1 2 not to the union/association. 8. It's every union member's 1 2 responsibility to see to it that management "lives up to" all terms of the Articles of Agreement. § 00 Agree 0" Agree “ Strongly Agree 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. l6. 17. 148 It is the duty of every worker "to keep his/her ears open" for information that might be useful to the union/association. Members of this local are not expected to have a strong personal commitment to the union/association. Moving ahead in the Hospital is more important than staying in the union/association. Members should pay attention to the union label. A union/association member has more security than most members of management. I feel little loyalty toward this union/association. As long as I'm doing the kind of work I enjoy, it does not matter if I belong to a union/ association. It's every member's duty to support or help another worker use the grievance procedure. I believe that union member- ship and participation should be positive factors of merit and efficiency. Strongly Disagree |._.l Disagree Slightly Disagree '5 Neither Ln Slightly N b) Agree Ch Agree ‘4 Strongly Agree 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 149 F, Strongly Disagree Disagree Slightly Disagree '5 Neither U1 Slightly N w I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond that normally expected of a member in order to make the union/ association successful. I could just as well work in l 2 3 a non-union hospital as long as the type of work was similar. I have little confidence and l 2 3 trust in most members of my union/association. I talk up the union/associ- l 2 3 ation to my friends as a great organization to be a member of. There's a lot to be gained 1 2 3 by joining a union/association. The council newsletter . . . l 2 3 is not worth reading. I doubt that I would do 1 2 3 special work to help the union/ association. Deciding to joint the union/ 1 2 3 association was a smart move on my part. My values and the union/ 1 2 3 association's values are not very similar. It's every member's duty to l 2 3 know exactly what the Articles of Agreement entitle him/her to. Agree 0‘ Agree " Strongly Agree 150 Strongly Disagree 28. I rarely tell others that I am 1 a member of the union/associa- tion. 29. It's the steward's job, not the 1 members' duty, to see that management is living by the con- tract. 30. It's every union member's l responsibility to see that other members "live up to" all the terms of the Articles of Agreement. 31. If asked, I would serve on a 1 committee for the union/ association. 32. The union/association news- 1 letter does not contain any useful information. 33. If asked, I would run for an 1 elected office in the union/ association. 34. It's easy "to be yourself" 1 and still be a member of the union/association. 35. Very little that the membership 1 wants has any real importance to the union/association. 36. The member does not get enough 1 benefits for the money taken by the union/association for initiation fees and dues. N Disagree Slightly Disagree 9 Neither U1 Slightly Agree Agree “ Strongly Agree b) O‘ 151 >10 0) ma) >» m H m airsa) H F1 .4 m54 H 4JL4 m +J U» c m c».cr».c 12a) w c1m o m «3 own 9 (PG) m c>m urn m w+m *4-asq H L4H -Hw4-H Fwd a)r4tn m +3m Lac: 0 (DC) 2 c0s2r< 03¢ 37. Every member must be pre- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 pared to take the time and risk of filing a grievance. Here are some statements reflecting how some people View their jobs. Please indicate how strongly you Agree or Disagree that each statement reflects YOUR ATTITUDE toward your job with the Hospital by Circling the appropriate number. TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE THAT. mu) m >~m >. m r40) w ram $4.4 F4 ms4 u 4JL1 m +1 m at» U\£SUWJ3.Cm ch m vim 44-a:4 u L4H JJWJ-H Fwd aqutn m +Jua can a: one :2 UJ< st 03¢ 1. My job is one of the major I 2 3 4 5 6 7 satisfactions in my life. 2. There are many things that l 2 3 4 5 6 7 are more important to me than my job. 3. My job is only a small part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 of who I am. 4. Overall, I am very much 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 involved in my job. 5. I would not want my job to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 be a central part of my life. 6. I live, eat, and breathe l 2 3 4 5 6 7 7. The most important things 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 that happen to me involve my job. 8. In general, I have a great 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 deal of say or influence on how I perform my job. lo. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 152 >1 r-l m s o H 4J m My supervisors are receptive 1 and listen to my ideas and suggestions. In general, I have very 1 little say or influence in what goes on in my work group. In general, I have a great 1 deal of say or influence in what goes on in my work group. My supervisor sometimes asks my opinion when a problem comes up that involves my work. I am allowed to decide how to do my job. There are written rules and procedures available here to help me to do my job. When I encounter difficulties at work, there are clear rules and procedures which help me to solve them. In order to do my job, I am very much dependent on my fellow workers to do their jobs too. The kind of job I have re- quires that I work closely with others who have a job similar to mine. The way in which my fellow workers do their work has VERY LITTLE to do with whether or not I can do my job. 1 1 l 1 l l Disagree “9 Disagree Slightly “’ Disagree .s Neither Slightly Agree U1 Agree m \J Strongly Agree 10. 11. 153 What is the probability that you will QUIT YOUR JOB for whatever reason with the Hospital within the next TWO YEARS? ( ) vvvvv 100% - I AM ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT I WILL BE QUITTING 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% - I AM ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT I WILL NOT BE QUITTING Listed below are a series of statements that represent possible FEELINGS that YOU might have about the Hospital. Please indicate how strongly you Agree or Disagree that each statement reflects YOUR ATTITUDES toward the Hospital by circling the appropfiate number. TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE THAT. . >wm H w own a m o m u m +ha can I am willing to put in l a great deal of effort beyond that normally expected to help the Hospital be successful. I talk up the Hospital 1 to my friends as a great organization to work for. I feel very little loyalty 1 to the Hospital. I would accept almost any 1 types of job assignments in order to keep working for the Hospital. I find that my values and 1 the values of the Hospital are very similar. '° Disagree Slightly Disagree '5 Neither 0) >1 .4 4.) 5:0 a) bid a) -H$4 H rfitfi m ms< d 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 6 ‘4 Strongly Agree 6. 10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 154 I am proud to tell others that I am part of the Hospital. I could just as well be working for a different hospital as long as the type of work was similar. The Hospital inspires the very best of me in the way of job performance. It would take very little change in my present circumstances to cause me to leave the Hospital. I am extremely glad that I chose the Hosptial to work for over others I was considerating at the time I joined. There is not too much to Strongly 5‘ Disagree be gained by sticking with the Hospital indefinitely. Often, I find it diffi- cult to agree with the Hospital's policies on important matters re- lating to its employees. I really care about the fate of the Hospital For me, the Hospital is the best of all possible organizations for which to work. k: Disagree Slightly 9’ Disagree .12. Neither Slightly Agree U'l 9‘ Agree \1 Strongly Agree mmmmm >. >. H0) WHGJHH H OH H-HH (ID-U OW cmmnmnnmmsw OthUUHU-IJU‘CDCDOQ) Hmm-Hm-H-HHHHH uw4-H Fwd aqucp m +1m 15 d kf h moomozmnzxcma: . Deci in to wor or t e 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Hospital was a definite mistake on my part. **STOP** Before you go any further Raise Your Hand for a M.S.U. ResearcH Member to assist you For each of the following questions we would like you to write a number as an answer. We will give you a yard- stick to use in responding. These questions will deal with the amount you receive for wages at the Hospital. All answers will be compared to what we have defined as the average amount of fairness based on the typical duties, knowledge, skills and abilities required to do your job. The average amount of fairness is represented by 100. The total absence of fairness is represented by ET— Here is an example: QUESTION YARDSTICK ' ANSWER How fair is the amount 0 = totally unfair l 1 of time you receive for 100 = average 1 coffee breaks? If you think the amount of time you receive for coffee breaks is average in terms of fairness, write 100. If you think it is above average you would write I55, 123, 144 or any other number. If you think it is tWIEe §§_fair as average, write 399- ~ If you think the amount of time you receive for coffee breaks is less fair than average, e.g., 1/2 as fair, write 50. If you think that it is even less than 1/2 as fair ySE would write £9,‘2§, 19, Q or any other number. 156 QUESTION YARDSTICK ANSWER 12. How fair is the amount 0 totally unfair you receive for wages? 100 average fairness based on typical duties, skills, knowledge, and abilities. For the next set of questions we would like you to tell us how fair you think the abount you receive for wages when compared totflmaamount received by others in ygur bargaining unit at the Hospital. When making these fairness judgments, think about your duties, knowledge, skills, and abilities as compared to the duties, knowledge, skills and abilities of others in your bargaining unit at the Hospital. Here, 100 = what others in your bargaining unit at the Hospital receive in terms of wages. QUESTION YARDSTICK _ ANSWER 13. How fair is the amount 0 totally unfair you receive for wages? 100 what others in your bargaining unit at the Hospital receive. For the next set of questions we would like you to tell us how fair you think the amount you receive for wages when compared to the amount received by employees in the other H bargaining unit at the Hospital (either MNA or Steelworkers). 157 When making these fairness judgments, think about our duties, knowledge, skills and abilities as compared to the duties, knowledge, skills and abilities of employees in the other bargaining unit at the Hospital. Here, 100 = what‘employees in—the other bargaining unit at the Hospital receive. i QUESTION YARDSTICK ANSWER 14. How fair is the amount 0 = totally unfair you receive for wages? 100 = what employees in the other bargain- ing unit at the Hospital ”receive. Fortflmanext set of questions we would like you to tell us how fair you think the amount you receive for wages is when compared to the amounts received by workersyperform- ing nursing related duties (RNs, LPNs, orderlies, aideET employedixnthe surrounding area. When making these fair- ness judgments, thihk about your duties, knowledge, skills and abilities as compared to the knowledge, skills and abilities of workers performing nursing related duties in the surrounding area. Here, 100 = what workers performing nursing related duties employed in the surrounding area receive. QUESTION YARDSTICK ANSWER 15. How fair is the amount 0 totally unfair you receive for wages? 100 = what workers performing related duties employed in the surrounding area receive. 158 For the next set of questions we would like you to tell us how fair you think the amount you receive for wages is when compared to the amount reEeived by workers performing nursing;related duties (RNs, LPNsLyorderliestaidesi around the country._iWhen making these fairness judgments, think about your duties, knowledge, skills and abilities as compared totflmaduties, knowledge, skills and abilities of workers_performing nursing related duties around the country. Here,—IOO = what workers performing nursing related duties around the country receiVe. I" _'_ QUESTION YARDSTICK ANSWER 16. How fair is the amount 0 = totally unfair you receive for wages? 100 = what workers performing nurs1ng reiated duties around the country receive. g Now we would like you to indicate how important these other groups are in determining how fair you see your wages. Using the list presented below, distribute 100 points among the groups to indicate how important they are. Thus, the most important group would have the highest number of points. —i l7. DISTRIBUTE 100 POINTS AMONG THE GROUPS TO INDICATE THEIR IMPORTANCE IN YOUR FEELINGS OF FAIRNESS. Points a) Myself, in terms of the duties, know- ledge and abilities I provide . . . b) Others in your bargaining unit at the Hospital . . . c) Employees in the other bargaining unit at the Hospital . . . d) Workers performing nursing-related duties in the surrounding area. . . e) Workers performing nursing-related duties around the country. . . TOTAL = 100 159 18. If you would like to provide any comments, please use the space below. APPENDIX B MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR VARIABLES CONTAINED IN THE HEURISTIC MODEL VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION Organizational Commitment 63.5 14.7 Age 36.0 10.7 Tenure (in months) 105.9 92.6 Education Level Attainment High Level vs. Low Level .22 .42 Medium Level vs. Low Level .65 .48 Job Involvement 23.1 6.5 Perceived Functional Dependence 16.2 3.2 Perceived Decentralization 25.6 7.9 Perceived Formalization 10.1 2.5 Union/Association Commitment 179.5 29.3 Perceived Wage Equity-- Self Referent 2,949.2 2,080.8 Perceived Wage Equity-- Multiple Referent 8,532.8 2,215.7 Intent to Remain 28.02 30.9 160 LIST OF REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES Abramson, E., Cutler, H.A., Kautz, R.W., and Mendelson, M. Social power and commitment: A theoretical statement. American Sociological Review, 1958, 23, 15-22. Adams, J.S. Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963, 67, 422-436. Adams, J.S. Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 2. New York: Academic Press, 1965. Alderfer, C.P. A critique of Salancik and Pfeffer's examination of need satisfaction theories. Administrative Science Quarterlyy 1977, 22, 658-609. Alutto, J.A., Hrebiniak, L.G., and Alonso, R.C. On Operationalizing the concept of commitment. Social Forces, 1973, 51, 448-454. Antonovsky, H.F., and Antonovsky, A. Commitment in an Israeli Kibbutz. Human Relations, 1974, 27, 303-319. Aranya, N., and Jacobson, D. An empirical study of theories of organizational and occupational commitment. The Journal of Social Psyghology, 1975, 97, 15-22. Argyris, C. Integrating the individual and the organization. New York: Wiley, 1964. Barbash, J. Collective bargaining: Contemporary American experience - a commentary. In G.G. Sommers (Ed.), Collective Bargaining: Comtemporary American Experience. Madison: Industrial Relations Research Association, 1980. Barnett, G.A., Hamlin, D.M., and Danowski, J.A. The use of fractionation scales for communication audits. In B. Rubin (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 5; New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books-ICA, 1982. Becker, H.S. Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal pf Sociology, 1960, 66, 32-40. 161 162 Blau, F.M. Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley, 1964. Blau, F.M., and Scott, R.W. Formal organizations: A 1 comparative approach. San Francisco: Chaldler, 962. Brown, M.E. Identification and some conditions of organizational involvment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1969, 14, 346-355. Buchanan, B. Building organizational commitment. The socialization of managers in work organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1974, 19, 533-546. (a) Buchanan, B. Government managers, business executives, and organizational commitment. Public Administration Review, 1974, Ju1y7August, 339-347. (b) Buchanan, B. To walk an extra mile: The whats, whens, and whys of organizational commitment. Organizational Dynamics, 1975, 3, 67-80. Cann, A., Sherman, S.J., and Bikes, R. Effects of initial request size and timing of a second request on compliance: The foot in the door and the door in the face. Journal gf Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 33L 774-782. Card, J.J. Career commitment processes in young adult years: An illustration from the ROTC/Army career path. Journal gf Vocational Behavior, 1978, 12, 53-75. Carrell, M.R., and Dittrich, J.E. Equity theory: The recent literature, methodological considerations, and new directions, Academy gf Management Review, 1978, 3, 202-210. Cialdini, R.B., Cacioppo, J.T., Bassett, R., and Miller J.A. Low-Ball procedure for producing compliance: Commitment then cost. Journal gf Personality and Social Psychology, 1978, 36L 463-476. Cohen, J., and Cohen P. Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1975. Cummings, L.L., and Berger, C.J. Organization structure: How does it influence attitudes and performance. Organizational Dynamics, 1976, 5, 34-49. 163 Dean, L.R. Union activity and dual loyalty. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 1954, 1L 526-536. Doeringer, P., and Piore, M.I. Internal labor markets and manpower analysis. Lexington, MA: Heath, 1971. Dubin, R., Champoux, J.E. and Porter, L.W. Central life interests and organizational commitment of blue-collar and clerical workers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1975, 20L 411-421. Eisenberg, E.M. Integration into communication networks and organizational commitment. Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1981. Etzioni, A. A comparative evaluation pf complex organizations: Op power, involvement and their correlates. New York, 1975. Etzioni, A. The semi:professions and their organization. New York: The Free Press, 1969. Farrell, D., and Rusbult, C.E. Exchange variables as predictors of job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover: The impact of rewards, costs, alternatives, and investments. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1981, 2S; 78-95. Festinger, L. A theory of social comparisons. Human Relations, 1954, 1L 117-140. Festinger, L. ‘A theory pg cognitive dissonance. New York: Harper and Row, 1957. Festinger, L., and Carlsmith, J.M. Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal g; Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 58, 203-210. Finn, R.H., and Lee, S.M. Salary equity: Its determination, analysis, and correlates. Journal pf Applied Psychology, 1972, 56, 283-292. Friedman, A., and Goodman, P. Wage inequity, self- qualifications, and productivity. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1967, 2L 406-417. Garland, H. The effects of piece rate underpayment and overpayment on job performance: A test of equity theory with a new induction procedures. Journal pf Applied Social Psychology, 1973, 3L'325-334. 164 Goffman, E. Encounters. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1961. Goodman, P.S. An examination of referents used in the evaluation of pay. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1974, 12, 170-195. Goodman, P.S. Social comparison processes in organizations. In E.M. Staw and G.R. Salancik (eds.), New directions 12 organizational behavior. Chicago: St. Clair, 1977. Goodman, P.S., and Friedman, A. An examination of Adams' theory of inequity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1971, 16, 271-288. Gordon, M.E., Philpot, J.W., Burt, R.B., Thompson, C.A., and Spiller, W.E. Commitment to the union: Development of a measure and examination of its correlates. Journal pf Applied Psychology, 1980, 65L 479-499. Gordon, M.E., Beauvais, L.L., and Ladd, R.T. The job satisfaction and union commitment of unionized engineers. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 1984, 31y_359-370. Gouldner, A.W. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 1960, 25, 161-179. Grusky, 0. Career mobility and organizational commitment. Administrative Science Quarterlyy 1966, 10, 488-503. Hall, D.T., and Schneider, B. Correlates of organizational identification as a function of career pattern and organizational type. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1972, 111 340-350. Hall, D.T., Schneider, B., and Nygren, H.T. Personal factors in organizational identification. Administrative Science Quarterly! 1970, 15, 176-189. Herman, J.E., Dunham, R.B., and Hulin, C.L. Organizational structure, demographic characteristics, and employee responses. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1975, 13L 206-232. Hill, F.S. The relevant other in pay comparisons. Industrial Relations, 1980, 19, 345-351. 165 Homans, G.C. Social behavior. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1961. Homans, G.C. Social behavior as exchange. Amerian Journal pf Sociology, 1968, 63, 597-606. Hopping, B. Professionalism and Unionism: Conflicting ideologies. Nursinngorces, 1976, 15, 372-383. Hovland, C.I., Campbell, E.H., and Brock, T. The effects of "commitment" on Opinion change following communication. In C.I. Hovland, E.H. Campbell, and T. Brock (Eds.), The order pf presentation 13 persuasion. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957. Hoxie, R.F. Trade unionism 12 the United States. New York: Appleton, 1919. Hoyt, M.E., and Centers, R. Temporal situs of the effects of anticipated publicity upon commitment and resistance to countercommunication. Journal 9: Personality and Social Psychology, 1972, 32L 1-7. Hrebiniak, L.G., and Alutto, J.A. Personal and role-related factors in the development of organizational commitment. Administrative Science Quarterlyy 1972, 17, 555-572. Huszczo, G.E. The relative importance of variables related £9 participation ip_union EEtiVities. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1975. Jacox, A. Conflicting loyalties in collective bargaining: An empirical illustration. Journal 2: James, L.R., and Jones, A.P. Organizational structure: A review of structural dimensions and their conceptual relationships with individual attitudes and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, 19; 74-113. Jaques, E. Equitable Payment. New York: Wiley, 1961. Kanter, R.M. Commitment and social organization: A study of commitment mechanisms in utopian communities. American Sociological Review, 1968, 33, 499-517. 166 Katz, D. The attitude survey approach. In A. Kornhauser (ed). Psychology pf labor-management relations. Champaign, 111.: Industrial Relations Research Assn., 1949. Katz, D. The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 1964, 2L_131-146. Katz, F.E. Nurses. In A. Etzioni (Ed.), The semi- professions and their organization. New York: The Free Press, 1969. Kelley, H.H. Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium pp motivation. Linclon, NB: University of Nebraska, 1967. Kelley, H.H. The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 1974, 28, 107-128. Kidron, A. Work values and organizational commitment. Academy pf Management Journal, 1978, 21, 239-247. Kiesler, C.A. The s cholo of commitment: Experiments link1pg behaviBr pg beliéf. New York: Academic Press, 1971. Kiesler, C.A., Kiesler, S.B., and Pallak, M.S. The effect of commitment to future interaction in reaction to norm violations. Journal pf Personalityy 1967, 35, 585-599. Kiesler, C.A., Nisbett, R.B., and Zanna, M.P. On inferring one's belief from one's behavior. Journal 9; Personality and Social Psychology, 1969, 11; 321-327. Kiesler, C.A., Pallak, M.S., and Kanouse, D.E. Interaction of commitment and dissonance. Journal 9: Personality and Social Psychology, 1968, 8L 331-338. Kiesler, C.A., and Sakamura, J. A test of a model for commitment. Journal pf Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 3y_349-353. Koch, J.L., and Steers, R.M. Job attachment, satisfation, and turnover among public sector employees. Journal g£_Vocationa1 Behavior, 1978, 12, 119-128. 167 Krackhardt, D., McKenna, J., Porka, L.W., and Steers, R.M. Supervisory behavior and employee turnover: A field experiment. Academy 9; Management Journal, 1981, 231 249-259. Kruger, D.H. Bargaining and the nursing profession. Monthly Labor Review, 1961, 84, 699-705. Lee, S.M. Organizational identification of scientists. Academy 9: Management Journal, 1969, 12, 327-337. Lee, S.M. An empirical analysis of organizational identification. Academy pf Management Journal, 1971, 14, 213-226. Lodahl, T.M., and Kejner, M. The definition and measurement of job involvement. Journal 2; Applied Psychology, 1965, 49, 24-33. March, J.G., and Simon, H.A. Organizations. New York: Wiley, 1958. McGregor, D. The human side pf enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960. McEvoy, P. Unionization or professionalization: Which way for nurses? Nursing Mirror, 1975, 141, 70-72. McKelvey, W. Expectational noncomplementarity and style of interaction between profession and organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1969, 14, 21-32. Merton, R. Social theopy and social structure. Glencoe, Illinois. Free Press, 1957. Miles, R.E. Human relations or human resources? Harvard Business Review, 1965, 43, 148-163. Miller, R.U. Hospitals. In G.G. Somers (Ed.), Collective bargaining: Contemporary American experience. Madison: Industrial Relations Research Assocaition, 1980. Mirvis, P.H., and Lawler, E.E. Measuring the financial impact of employee attitudes. Journal 2: Applied Mobley, W.H. Intermediate linkages in the relationship between job satisfaction and employee turnover. Journal pg Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 237-240. 168 Morris, J.H., and Steers, R.M. Structural influences on organizational commitment. Journal g£_Vocationa1 Behavior, 1980, 17, 50-57. Morris, J., and Sherman, J.D. Generalizability of an organizational commitment model. Academy 9; Management Journal, 1981, 24, 512-526. Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W., and Dubin, R. Unit performance, situational factors, and employee attitudes in spatially separated work units. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1974, 121.231'248° Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M., and Porter, L.W. The measurement 2; organizational commitment{_7§ ppogress report. Technical Report No. 15, Department of Management, Graduate School of Management, University of Oregon, Euguene, OR, July, 1978. Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M., and Porter, L.W. The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal pf Vocational Behavior, 1979, 14, 224-247. Newman, J.E. Understanding the organizational structure/ job attitude relationship through perceptions of the work environment. Qgganizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, l4L’371-397. Nicholson, N., Ursell, G., and Blyton, P. The dynamics 9; white collar unionism. London: Academic Press, 1980. Patchen, M. Absence and employee feelings about fair treatment. Personnel Psychology, 1960, 13, 349-360. Perlman, S. Theory pf the labor movement. New York: Macmillan, 1928. Pfeffer, JJ, and Lawler, E.J. Effects of job alternatives extrinsic rewards, and behavioral commitment on attitude toward the organization: A field test of the sufficient justification paradigm. Administrative Science Quarterlyy 1980, 25L 38-56. Pincus, D.M., and Reagan, P.R. The Pincus-Reagan Equity Scale. Unpublished paper, School of Labor and Industrial Relations, Michigan State University, 1982. Porter, L.W., Crampon, W.JJ, and Smith, F.JJ Organizational commitment and managerial turnover: A longitudinal study. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, lg; 87-98. 169 Porter, L.W., and Lawler, E.E. Properties of organizational structure in relation to job attitudes and job behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 1965, 64, 23-51 0 Porter, L.W., and Smith, F.J. The etiology pg organizational commitment. Unpu 11s ed paper, University of California, Irvine, 1970. Porter, L.W., and Steers, R.M. Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee turnover and absenteeism. Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 151-176. Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T., and Boulian, P.V. Organizational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal pg Applied Psychology, 1974, pay 603-609. Pritchard, R.D. Equity theory: A review and critique. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Pritchard, R.D., Dunnette, M.D., and Jorgenson, D.D. Effects of perceptions of equity and inequity on worker performance and satisfaction. Journal pf Applied Psychology, 1972, gpy 75-94. Purcell, T.V. Dual allegiance to company and union- packinghouse workers. A Swift-UPWA study in a crisis situation, 1949-1952. Personnel Psychology, 1954, 7, 48-58. Purcell, T.VC The worker speaks his mind on company and union. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1953. Rabinowitz, 8., and Hall, D.T. Organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 1977, 84, 265-288. Reynolds, L.G. Labor economics and labor relations. New York: Prentice Hall, 1975. Rhodes, S.R., and Steers, R.M. Conventional vs. worker-owned organizations. Human Relations, 1981, 34, 1013-1035. Ritzer, G., and Trice, H.M. An empirical study of Howard Becker's side-bet theory. Social Forces, 1969, 47, 475-478. 170 Rotondi, T. Organizational identification: Issues and implications. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1975, 13, 95-109. Rusbalt, C.E. Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal pf Experimental Social Psyghology, 1980, 191 172-186. Rusbalt, C.E., and Farrell, D. A longitudinal test of the investment model: The impact on job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of variations in rewards, costs, alternatives, and investments. Journal pf Applied Psychology, 1983, 98L 429-438. Salancik, G.R. Commitment is too easy! Organizational Dynamics, 1977, 6 (1), 62-80(a). Salancik, G.R. Commitment and the control of organizational behavior and belief. In B.M. Staw and G.R. Salancik (Eds.), New directions ip organizational behavior. Chicago: St. Clair, 1977(57. Salancik, G.R. and Pfeffer, JJ A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterlyy 1978, 23, 224-253. Schoenherr, R.A. and Greeley, A.M. Role commitment processes and the American Catholic priesthood. American Sociological Review, 1974, 39, 407-426. Schriesheim, C.A., and Tsui, A.S. Dual commitment pp company and union: Fact pp fiction. Paper presented at the 40th Annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Detroit, 1980. Schuler, R.S. Determinants 23 job involvement: Individual vs. organizational: An extensipp pf the literature. Paper presented—3t_the meeting of the Academy of Management, New Orleans, 1975. Sheldon, M.E. Investments and involvements as mechanisms producing commitment to the organization. Administrative Science Quarterlyy 1971, 16, 142-150. Shoemaker, D.J., Snizek, W.E., and Bryant, C.D. Toward a further clarification of Becker's side-bet hypothesis as applied to organizational and occupational commitment. Social Forces, 1977, §§L 598-603. 171 Smith, F.J. Work attitudes as predictors of specific day attendance. Journal pf Applied Psychology, 1977, 62’ 16-190 Stagnar, R. Dual allegiance as a problem in modern society, Personnel Psychology, 1954, 7, 41-47. Stagnar, R., and Rosen, H. Psychology of union-management relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Ede, 1965. Staw, B.M. Attitudinal and behavioral consequences of changing a major organizational reward: A natural field experiment. Journal pf Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 221 742-751. Staw, B.M. Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. nganizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, 124.27'44° Staw, B.M., and Fox, F.V. Escalation: The determinants of commitment to a chosen course of action. Human Relations, 1977, 30, 431-450. Stebbins, R.A. On misunderstanding the concept of commitment: A theoretical clarification. Social Forces, 1970, 48, 526-529. Stebbins, R.A. Commitment pp deviance. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Co., 1971. Steers, R.M. Effects of need achievement on the job performance-job attitude relationship. Journal pf Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 678-682. Steers, R.M. Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1977, 22, 46-56. Steers, R.M., and Rhodes, S.R. Major influences on employee attendance: A proces model. Journpl pf Applied Psyghology, 1978, 63, 391-407. Stevens, JJM., Beyer, J.M., and Trice, H.M. Assessing personal, role, and organizational predictors of managerial commitment. Academy pf Management Journal, 1978, 31; 380-396. Telly, C.JC, French, W.L., and Scott, W.G. The relationship of inequity to turnover among hourly workers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1971, 16, 164-172. 172 Torgerson, W.S. Theory and methods pf scaling. New York: Wiley, 1958. Webb, 8., and Webb, B. History pg trade unionism; London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1920. Weick, KJE. The concept of equity in the perception of pay. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1966, 11, 414-439. Weissenberg, P., and Gruenfeld, L.W. Relationship between job satisfaction and job involvement. Journal pg Applied Psychology, 1968, 52, 469-473. Wiener, Ed, and Gechman, A.S. Commitment: A behavioral approach to job involvement. Journal pf‘Vocational Behavior, 1977, 10, 47-52. Yuchtman, E. Reward distribution and work-role attractiveness in the Kibbutz: Reflections on equity theory. American Sociological Review, 1972, 31L 581-595.