Work-Related Commitment and Job Performance: It's Also the Nature of Performance That Counts

Work-Related Commitment and Job Performance: It's also the Nature of the Performance
That Counts
Author(s): Mark John Somers and Dee Birnbaum
Source: Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 19, No. 6 (Nov., 1998), pp. 621-634
Published by: Wiley
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3100166
Accessed: 13-02-2018 02:22 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3100166?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Wiley is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Organizational Behavior
This content downloaded from 202.43.93.7 on Tue, 13 Feb 2018 02:22:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Journal of Organizational Behavior
J. Organiz. Behav. 19, 621-634 (1998)
Work-related commitment and job

performance: it's also the nature
of the performance that counts
MARK JOHN SOMERSl* AND DEE BIRNBAUM2

' School of Industrial Management, New Jersey Institute of Technology and Rutgers-Newark,
Newark, NJ 07102, U.S.A.
2Economics and Business Administration, Rhodes College, Memphis, TN 38112, U.S.A.
Summary This study tested the proposition that relationships among the various types of work-
related commitment and job performance are affected by both the form of commitment
and the facet of performance under consideration. Results provided some support for
this view. As hypothesized, job involvement was related only to performance tied to
intrinsically rewarding elements of work, and career commitment was positively related
to overall performance effectiveness. Unexpectedly, however, organizational commit-
ment (both affective and continuance) was unrelated to job performance. The discussion
is centered on practical implications of these findings and on directions for future
research. ( 1998 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Introduction
Interest in work-related commitment has been sparked by its potential benefits to individuals
and to organizations. Committed employees are characterized as loyal, productive members of
work organizations (Porter, Steers, Mowday and Boulian, 1974) who identify with organiza-
tional goals and organizational values (Buchanan, 1974). Consequently, a wide array of desirable
behavioral outcomes have been linked to work-related commitment including: employee
retention, job performance, attendance, work quantity, work quality, and personal sacrifice on
behalf of the organization (London, 1983; Rabinowitz and Hall, 1977; Randall, 1990).
Although much of the interest in work-related commitment stems from its perceived benefits,
research is focused on its development; that is, on antecedents and correlates. Comparatively
fewer studies of hypothesized consequences of commitment are available and the focus of much
of this research, as noted by Meyer, Paunonen, Gellatly, Goffin and Jackson (1989), is on
employee turnover. One variable that remains under-researched is job performance (Randall,
1990), an important omission in that many of the beneficial outcomes attributed to work-related
commitment are derivatives of individual performance in work organizations (cf. Steers, 1977).
Studies of the commitment-performance relationship that are available have been hampered
by a limited conceptual frame. In response to this problem, work-related commitment has been
* Correspondence to: Mark John Somers, New Jersey Institute of Technology and Rutgers-Newark School of Industrial
Management, NJIT, Newark, NJ 07102, U.S.A.
CCC 0894-3796/98/060621-14$17.50 Received 10 August 1995

C 1998 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 16 September 1996
622 M. J. SOMERS AND D. BIRNBAUM
increasingly viewed as a constellation of attitudinal variables tied to specific foci

and Gellatly, 1990; Morrow and McElroy, 1986; Reichers, 1985). Similarly, job
viewed as multidimensional, yet most research on the commitment-perform
includes only one commitment variable and only one dimension of performa
the need for a more inclusive approach to studying work-related commitm
recognized (Blau, Paul and St. John, 1993).
Work-Related Commitment
and Job Performance
Work-related commitment has been defined as a set of similar, but distinct attitudinal variables
tied to specific foci. Five foci have been identified: the job, the organization, the work group, the
career, and work values (Blau, 1989; Morrow and McElroy, 1986). These various types of
commitment have been studied independently of each other (Reichers, 1985; Wiener and Vardi,
1980) using focus-specific process models to guide research on any given topic area. Examination
of these process models indicates that not all forms of work-related commitment are hypo-
thesized to influence job performance; direct linkages to performance are posited only for
commitment to the job, the career, and the organization (cf. Ayree and Tan, 1992; Meyer and
Allen, 1991; Rabinowitz and Hall, 1977). As such, this study is concerned with relationships
between job, career and organizational commitment and job performance. Because the terms
'commitment' and 'performance' have been used in different ways, it is important to specify how
these constructs are defined in any given study. Our discussion, thus, begins with definitional
issues and then turns to the nature of the commitment-performance relationship.
Work-related commitment
Job commitment
Commitment to the job (also termed job involvement; cf. Blau, 1989; Blau et al., 1993; Randall
and Cote, 1991) is defined as psychological absorption in work activities (Kanungo, 1979;
Morrow, 1983). Research findings indicate job commitment stems from intrinsically satisfying
work (Lefkowitz, Somers and Weinberg, 1984), and theory has linked this variable to job
performance (Rabinowitz and Hall, 1977; Wiener and Vardi, 1980). Interest in job commitment
has waned somewhat as commitment research has focused on other foci, especially the organ-
ization.
Career commitment
The concept of career commitment evolved from interest in the ongoing evaluation of one's
career choices. The more general notion of career salience (cf. Greenhaus, 1973) has been distilled
into a more specific attitudinal variable encompassing one's attachment to and willingness to
remain in one's present career (Blau, 1989). Although it is an important element of work-related
commitment, career commitment remains under-researched relative to commitment to the job
and to the organization (Ayree and Tan, 1992).
? 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 19, 621-634 (1998)
WORK-RELATED COMMITMENT AND JOB PERFORMANCE 623
Organizational commitment
Commitment to the organization is defined as an attitudinal variable character
enduring psychological attachment. Two widely studied forms of attachment, and th
two forms of organizational commitment have been proposed (cf. Mathieu and Zajac,
most accepted form of commitment casts this variable as an emotional attachm
organization that includes acceptance of organizational values and a desire to rem
organization (Porter et al., 1974). Termed affective commitment to the organization (
Allen, 1984), this construct coexists with a second well known type of commitment t
investments or perceived sunk costs in the organization (Becker, 1960). Labeled
commitment to the organization (Meyer and Allen, 1984), this concept represents a p
attachment to an organization associated with the perceived value of one's accrued
in an organization and their perceived effect on opportunities for exit.
Summary
Unique (i.e. non-overlapping) commitment variables with distinct work-related foci that can be
used to form constellations or profiles of commitment (cf. Allen and Meyer, 1990; Becker and
Billings, 1993) are evident in the literature.
Job performance
As is the case with work-related commitment, job performance is also viewed as an amalgam of
distinct, but related constructs (Astin, 1964). Although the multifaceted nature of job perform-
ance has been recognized for quite some time, research in this area is characterized by a strong
emphasis on one dimension, task proficiency, usually as rated by one's immediate supervisor. As
is the case with work-related commitment, however, this view of job performance is changing.
Recent developments in theory and in the practice of human resources management have led to
what has been termed by Borman (1990) as an enlarge criterion space; this is, dimensions of job
performance other than (supervisor-rated) task proficiency are increasingly seen as important in
understanding human performance in work organizations.
One element of this enlarged criterion space concerns on-the-job behaviors that extend beyond
proficiency in the tasks that comprise one's job (Borman, 1990). This broader notion of
performance has its roots in prosocial behavior in organizations (Brief and Motowidlo, 1986)
and is characterized by activities that benefit individuals, work groups or the entire organization.
Similarly, Organ (1988) and Smith, Organ and Near (1983) offer the notion of organizational
citizenship as an illustration of behavior that benefits organizations. Citizenship has a clear
prosocial element in that it includes altruistic behavior in addition to generalized compliance with
organizational norms, policies and procedures.
This theme of altruistic or prosocial activities is especially relevant to commitment in
organizations as these activities do not fall within the purview of formal organizational reward
and control systems (as does task proficiency), but rather are governed by commitment and
socialization processes (Borman, 1990). Whether this dimension of job performance falls within
or lies outside of formal job responsibilities remains an open question which is not easily resolved
(Borman, 1990).
In addition to behavior that is beneficial to organizations, there has also been some interest
expressed in behaviors that are detrimental to organizations; that is, unacceptable performance
which is harmful to individuals, groups and to the entire organization (Borman, 1990). It has been
( 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 19, 621-634 (1998)
suggested that under certain circumstances (in particular, jobs that are structur
defined procedures), disciplinary actions can be used as an index of this dimensio
and Campbell (1986, as cited in Borman, 1990) provides evidence of construc
measurement model. Specifically, disciplinary actions were correlated much mor
supervisory ratings related to disciplining employees than they were with ratings
Conceptual and empirical linkages between

work-related commitment and job performance
Proposed linkages between commitment and job performance were initial

properties ascribed to each form of work-related commitment. That is, one of t
benefits of being committed at work (to the job, career and/or organization
performance. This general proposition has not been challenged, but rather has b
more attention has been focused on clearly articulating the properties ascribed t
commitment.
A formal model mapping the process through which commitment to the job, career and
organization affect job performance has also been proposed. Wiener and Vardi (1980) have
suggested that commitment influences performance through two intervening variables: effort and
attachment. Their model is useful because it provides a basis for distinguishing between commit-
ment, motivation and attachment, and, in so doing, provides a framework for gaining a better
understanding of empirical relationships between work-related commitment and job performance.
Examined across its various work-related foci, commitment has not been consistently related
to individual job performance which has led to some modification of the general hypothesis that
commitment is positively related to performance in work organizations. More specifically, studies
of the job commitment-job performance hypothesis have yielded some findings in the predicted
direction, but results were spotty and relationships were modest (Rabinowitz and Hall, 1977).
Wood (1974) has offered an explanation for these mixed results, suggesting that because job
commitment is driven by intrinsic satisfaction, it should be related only to those facets of job
performance tied to intrinsically rewarding elements of work. Inconsistent relationships between
job commitment and job performance are, in turn, attributed to inappropriate tests of the
commitment-performance hypotheses, and not as disconfirmation of it.
Tests of the organizational commitment-job performance relationship have fared better.
A recent meta-analysis indicates that affective commitment to the organization is positively related
to job performance (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990), but it has also been noted that there were
exceptions (i.e. nonsupportive results) to this overall finding (Randall, 1990). Advances in
commitment theory have also led to modification of the hypothesis that all forms of organ-
izational commitment are positively related to job performance. Because continuance commit-
ment reflects perceived sunk costs in an organization rather than the close emotional ties
characteristic of affective commitment to the organization, Meyer et al. (1989) hypothesized that
continuance commitment to the organization is negatively related to job performance. Differential
relationships between affective and continuance commitment to the organization and job
performance were observed in two studies (Konovsky and Cropanzano, 1991; Meyer et al., 1989),
but this hypothesis was partially disconfirmed in two others. Hackett, Bycio and Hausdorf (1994)
found that affective commitment to the organization was positively related to job performance but
that the relationship between continuance commitment to the organization and performance was
nonsignificant. Similarly, Mayer and Schoorman (1992) also reported a nonsignificant relation-
ship between continuance commitment to the organization and job performance.
Finally, although Wiener and Vardi (1980) have raised some concerns about
career commitment as an influence of performance, more recent work sugg
commitment is relevant to understanding individual job performance. Ayree and
pointed out that the career identity and career resilience components of London's
of career motivation are relevant to identifying behavioral outcomes of car
Career resilience, which is defined as resistance to career disruptions under
stances, is especially relevant to this study because it is closely tied to our co
career commitment and because it has been linked to individual performance
(London, 1983). As such, advances in theory have presented a basis for hypoth
relationship between career commitment and job performance. Given the pau
on career commitment (Ayree and Tan, 1992), it is not surprising that this h
untested.
The Study
Conceptual frame
Despite repeated concern about the limited conceptual frame used to study work-related
commitment (Reichers, 1985), most studies have included only one form of commitment.
Research on the relationship between work-related commitment and job performance has
followed this general pattern, so that most studies are based on one type of commitment and one
dimension of job performance. Consequently, not that much is known about how constellations
of commitment variables influence job performance nor have dimensions of performance other
than those based on supervisor rating (i.e. task proficiency) received much attention.
Studying the commitment-performance relationship using multiple dimensions of job
performance offers the possibility of new insights into commitment processes, but only if the
dimensions of performance selected are consistent with commitment theory and research. Task
proficiency represents the most commonly studied dimension of performance in general and with
respect to work-related commitment in particular. There is general agreement that task pro-
ficiency is relevant to understanding the commitment-performance relationship. There has,
however, been some concern expressed about an over-reliance of self-report measures of
performance in commitment research (Randall and Cote, 1990) so that supervisor-rated task
proficiency appears to be the preferred operationalization of this performance variable.
The enlarged criterion space discussed by Borman (1990) offers some new directions for studies
of work-related commitment and job performance. Performance that is beneficial to organ-
izations and their stakeholders and which is not tied to formal reward systems (that is, altruistic
or prosocial behavior) is clearly relevant to work-related commitment, especially commitment to
the job and the organization (cf. Mowday, Steers and Porter, 1982; Rabinowitz and Hall, 1977).
Similarly, behavior that is detrimental to organizations and individuals in organizations in the
form of unacceptable performance is related to commitment processes as it addresses contra-
normative or unsocialized behavior in organizations.
This study examines relationships between commitment to the job, career and organization
and three dimensions of job performance: (supervisor-rated) task proficiency, performance not
tied to formal reward systems that benefits organizations and performance that is detrimental to
organizations.
Research issues
Our general hypothesis is that work-related commitment influences job performance in a targeted
rather than in a pervasive manner; that is, all forms of commitment are not expected to be related
to all dimensions of job performance. Given the comparatively few number of empirical studies
on this topic and the early stage of theory development for some forms of work-related commit-
ment (e.g. career commitment), formal hypotheses are tenuous. Commitment theory and
research does, however, allow for anticipated results to be stated in some cases and for research
issues to be articulated in others.
We begin with a discussion of the relationship between affective commitment to the organ-
ization and job performance. Based on its conceptual definition and prior research results,
affective (organizational) commitment is likely to have the most pervasive influence on job
performance. Prior research has indicated that the emotional ties to an organization character-
istic of affective commitment are related to task proficiency, although relationships are modest
and inconsistent across studies. Affective commitment, based on its nature, also represents a
generalized support for the organization that is likely to translate into performance that is not
part of formal organizational reward systems but which benefits the organization and its
members; that is, committed employees should want to help the organization (cf. Mowday et al.,
1982). It seems unclear, at this point, whether affective commitment influences performance that
is detrimental to organizations. One research issue for this study is to examine the relationship
between affective commitment to the performance and unacceptable performance; that is, to
empirically test whether affective commitment to the organization provides some 'protection'
against performance that is detrimental to organizations.
More targeted relationships between the other forms of work-related commitment and job
performance are anticipated. Specifically, prior research indicates that continuance commitment
to the organization is negatively related to task proficiency (Konovsky and Cropanzano, 1991;
Meyer et al., 1989). Based on these findings, and on the explanation provided for them by Meyer
et al. (1989), we also anticipate a negative relationship between continuance commitment to the
organization and task proficiency. It is also interesting to consider possible relationships between
continuance commitment to the organization and performance that is detrimental to organ-
izations. The tenure-based sunk costs characteristics of continuance commitment to the organ-
ization might lead to the perception that termination or severe disciplinary action is unlikely
(a 'they can't touch me' effect) so that poor performance with respect to task proficiency might
'spillover' into more serious performance problems (and an observed positive relationship with
unacceptable performance). Alternatively, one might wish to protect one's accrued benefits and,
thus, exhibit care not to become highly visible by overtly unacceptable acts (leading to a negative
relationship with unacceptable job performance).
Prior research has consistently indicated that job commitment is unrelated to task proficiency
(Rabinowitz and Hall, 1977). A positive relationship with this dimension of job performance is,
thus, not anticipated. Rather, following Wood's (1974) notion that job commitment is related to
those aspects of performance that are not associated with formal organizational reward systems,
we anticipate a positive relationship between job commitment and performance that is beneficial
to organizations.
Finally, there are too few empirical studies to determine whether the proposition that career
commitment is positively related to job performance is tenable. Theory indicates that any influence
that career commitment might have on job performance does not extend into an enlarged criterion
space (cf. London, 1983). Thus, if career commitment is related to job performance, it is most likely
to take the form of a positive relationship between career commitment and task proficiency.
Method
Sample and procedures
The sample was comprised of 109 hospital employees drawn from a university teaching hospital
located in the southeastern United States. It was 87 per cent female and 65 per cent caucasian
with a mean age of 35.6 years and a mean organizational tenure of 55.8 months. A survey of work
attitudes, distributed and completed on-site, was used to collect data. Employees were asked to
provide their personnel numbers to permit access to performance data. Only employees whose
job responsibilities were relevant to all three indices of job performance (as determined by subject
matter experts on-site) were included in the study. Job titles included: registered nurse, licensed
practical nurse, and psychiatric technician. The response rate to the survey was 50 per cent.
Measures
Work-related commitment
Job commitment was measured with a 15-item scale developed and validated by Lefkowitz
et al. (1984) (a = 0.88). Organizational commitment was measured with Meyer and Allen's
(1984) 8-item affective and continuance commitment scale (a = 0.82 and 0.70 respectively).
Career commitment was measured with Blau's (1989) 7-item scale (a = 0.88). All commitment
variables were measured using 5-point Likert-type scales anchored from 'strongly disagree' to
'strongly agree'.
Job performance
The three facets of job performance included in the study were assessed with indicators taken
from employee personnel records.
Supervisor rated task proficiency Supervisor-rated task proficiency was measured with data
generated from the organization's formal performance appraisal process. The performance
appraisal instrument was based on job analysis, and ratings were used to determine salary
increments and promotions. Multiple dimensions of job performance were assessed, and these
ratings were then combined (as part of the performance appraisal procedure) by calculating a
weighted average reflecting final or 'overall' performance. This composite index was measured
along a 5-point scale (facet scores were not made available to us). Dimensions reflected task
proficiency across the elements of a given job. For example, the performance appraisal instrument
for the job title of registered nurse included the following dimensions: care planning activities,
clinical intervention activities, patient evaluation activities, and patient assessment activities.
Performance (not tied to formal reward systems) that is beneficial to organizations Performance
that benefits organizations was measured by tabulating the results of the hospital's survey of client
satisfaction and the number of unsolicited letters of commendation by patients. Patients and their
visitors are surveyed continuously and results are tabulated every 3 months. One component of
this client satisfaction survey provides respondents the opportunity to name employees who had
been particularly helpful or responsive. Each mention is recorded in that employee's personnel
file, as are unsolicited letters of commendation by patients. This measure was formed by summing
the total number of commendations (from the client survey and from unsolicited letters). In
keeping with the conceptual definition of this variable, interviews with s

respondents indicated that commendations were not used to administer ex
(i.e. pay, promotion), were not seen as a way of advancing one's career, but d
reflect performance that was 'above and beyond' one's job. Sixty per cent of the
least one commendation.
Performance that is detrimental to organizations Following Borman (1990), performance that is

detrimental to organizations was measured by tabulating the number of warnings (both verbal
and written) and suspensions that were in each employee's personnel file. The most common
reasons for warnings and suspensions included: failure to follow procedure, a poor attitude, and
absence without permission from the work unit during the work day. These reasons are
consistent with disciplinary actions as an index of troublemaking behavior that is detrimental to
individuals and organizations. Thirty-three per cent of the sample received at least one
disciplinary warning.
Statistical analyses
Initial parameter estimates were derived from simple, correlation analysis and from ordinary least
squares regression. The measures of performance that is beneficial to organizations and
performance that is detrimental to organizations were left censored (i.e. had a disproportionate
number of responses in the category 'zero'). For these variables, Tobit analysis (Takeshi, 1984) is
the most appropriate statistical technique. As is typically the case when less common regression
models are used in organizational research (cf. Morita, Lee and Mowday, 1993), OLS estimates
were presented to provide an interpretative context for the tobit models. They are biased and
should be interpreted accordingly.
Separate regression models were built hierarchically for each dimension of job performance
with the set of four commitment variables entered first. Following prior studies (Mayer and
Schoorman, 1992; Meyer et al., 1989), the effects of age and tenure on the observed relationships
between commitment and job performance were then assessed by entering these two variables
into each regression equation.
Results
Descriptive statistics
Means, standard deviations and zero-order correlations among study variables are presented
in Table 1.
Regression analyses
Parameter estimates from the OLS regression and Tobit analyses (where applicable) are
summarized in Table 2. Results were consistent with simple correlation analysis - controlling
for age and job tenure left intact significant positive relationships between career commitment
and task proficiency (, = 0.35; p < 0.01), and job commitment and extra role performance
Table 1. Means, standard deviations and correlations among study variables

Variable Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Job commitment 2.92 0.69

2. Career commitment 3.37 0.84 0.67
3. Affective commitment* 3.27 0.71 0.53 0.54
4. Continuance commitment* 2.91 0.62 0.16 -0.03 0.17
5. Task proficiency 3.64 0.47 -0.01 0.20 0.12 -0.05
6. Performance beneficial to 1.50 1.97 0.28 0.16 0.11 0.01 -0.05
organizations
7. Performance detrimental 0.93 2.28 0.02 -0.07 -0.09 0.12 -0.26 0.05
to organizations
N = 109.
Correlations significant at the 0.05 level are in italics.
Correlations significant at the 0.01 level are in boldface.
* Denotes commitment to the organization.
Table 2. Regression analyses: work-related commitment and job performance
Facets of job performance Pearson OLS OLS estimates with Tobit

estimates control variables coefficients
r /f t P t B t
Facet 1: Task proficiency

Job commitment -0.01 -0.30t? 2.22 na
Career commitment 0.20** 0.3511 2.60 na
Affective commitment* 0.12 0.07 0.65 na
Continuance commitment* -0.05 0.001 0.01 na
Model fit
R2 0.08? F = 2.33
Facet 2: Extra role performancet

Job commitment 0.2811 0.3411 2.60 0.3211 2.36 1.2111 2.16
Career commitment 0.16 -0.04 -0.39 -0.03 -0.24 -0.20 -0.20
Affective commitment* 0.11 -0.05 -0.42 -0.08 -0.65 -0.05 -0.10
Continuance commitment* -0.01 -0.04 -0.31 -0.02 -0.19 -0.39 -0.86
Model fit
R2 0.08T F = 2.39 0.10 F = 1.94
-2LL 198.3211
Facet 3: Disciplinar
Job commitment 0.02 0.13 0.93 0.12 0.95 1.22 0.99
Career commitment -0.07 -0.09 -0.67 -0.06 -0.45 -0.20 -0.20
Affective commitment* -0.09 -0.14 -1.13 -0.12 -1.06 -1.52 -1.46
Continuance commitment* 0.12 0.11 1.09 0.04 0.42 1.93 1.84
Model fit
R2 0.03 F = 0.448 0.14? F = 2.90
-2LL 149.0611
N= 109.
na = not applicable.
* Denotes commitment to the organization.
t Variable is left-censored and is not normally distributed. OLS parameter estimates for these variables are
should be interpreted as under-representations of effect sizes.
t Indicates classical suppression effect-interpret accordingly; control variables included age and job tenure.
statistic (-2LL) for Tobit analyses represents degree to which the model fits observed data with nons
indicating a good fit. Coefficients in Tobit models were not adjusted for age and job tenure. ?p < 0.05
?p < 0.06.
(/, = 0.32; p < 0.05; B = 1.21; p < 0.01). In contrast, organizational commitm
ive and continuance) was unrelated to job performance. Hypotheses 1 and 2 we
hypotheses 3 and 4 were not. Explained variance was modest as indicated by th
OLS regression and the significant log likelihood estimates from Tobit anal
Multivariate analyses also revealed a classical suppression effect. Suppres
a predictor variable is unrelated to the criterion, but controls for error
predictor variable; that is, variance that is shared between the predicto
variable that is unrelated (or negatively related) to the criterion variable (Guild
1973).
Classical suppression occurs when: (a) the suppressor variable is unrelated to the criterion, but is
significantly related to the other predictor variable; (b) the sign of the regression coefficient of the
suppressor variable is opposite that of the relevant predictor variable; (c) adding the suppressor
variable to the regression model results in a significant increase in explained variance; and (d) the
magnitude of the regression coefficients for both the suppressor and related predictor variables are
greater than their respective zero-order rs (Cohen and Cohen, 1983). As such, the significant
negative relationship between job commitment and overall job performance should be interpreted
accordingly, as the zero-order r between these two variables is nonsignificant (r = -0.01), as is its
regression coefficient without career commitment in the equation (/ = -0.09; p > 0.05).
Discussion
Even a cursory review of the literature on the topic of work attitudes reveals ongoing concerns
about whether these attitudes influence job performance. Studies for any given variable seem to
follow the same pattern: high expectations which are progressively tempered until the proposed
linkage with job performance is called into question. The variables which comprise work-related
commitment seem to be toward the latter end of this cycle. Expectations about predictive efficac
of several forms of work commitment with respect to job performance have been tempere
considerably (cf. Randall, 1990) and it has been suggested by some writers that work-relate
commitment does not (meaningfully) influence job performance (cf. Cohen and Lowenberg,
1990; Randall, Fedor and Longenecker, 1990).
Despite the pattern of results thus far, this conclusion seems premature. At this point, there
does not appear to be a sufficient body of research to reach a determination as to whether work-
related commitment influences job performance. Further, interpretation of many studies i
hampered by the confounding of early measures of affective and continuance commitment to the
organization (Meyer and Allen, 1984), an over-reliance on self-reported job performance
(Randall et al., 1990), and a preponderance of bivariate studies.
This study used a broader conceptual frame than of most prior research. In so doing, a general,
omnibus hypothesis linking commitment to job performance was replaced with an examination
of a series of facet-specific relationships. That is, not all forms of work-related commitment wer
expected to predict all facets of job performance. Our findings provided some support for this
view, but there were unanticipated results as well. Consistent with theory in this area (London,
1983), career commitment was positively related to task proficiency. This finding indicates that
attachment to one's career is likely to lead to a focus on those work activities that provid
tangible evidence of competence in one's chosen career and which are likely to lead to caree
advancement (in contrast, perhaps, to performance which benefits others).
In addition, and as anticipated, job commitment was related only to perf

beneficial to organizations. The psychological immersion in work characteristics o
ment, thus, seems to lead to a definition of one's work-related activities tha
responsibility to help others and/or the entire organization. Whether these behav
sically satisfying (cf. Wood, 1974) remains an open question, but the more g
performance not tied to organizational reward systems and which benefits other
understanding work-related commitment and seems to be an interesting area for
Multivariate analyses indicated that job commitment acted as a suppressor varia
and Cohen, 1983) with respect to career commitment. Substantive interpretation
involves identifying shared sources of variance between job commitment and car
that is unrelated to task proficiency. Our overall pattern of results provides
where this commonalty might lie in that job commitment is related to performanc
to formal organizational reward systems. It is plausible that some of the v
commitment is also associated with this type of performance in organizations sim
of being committed to one's career in a helping profession. This likely source of
commitment clearly is not related to the criterion of task proficiency and
'suppressed' by job commitment, thereby increasing the magnitude of the relatio
career commitment and task proficiency when job commitment is included i
model. Replication, of course, is necessary before any definite conclusions can be
can be noted that this particular result points out the importance of studyi
between work-related commitment and job performance using multivariate mode
Our unanticipated findings were associated with organizational commitm
commitment was unrelated to job performance regardless of the dimension
under consideration. In interpreting this result, it is important to keep in mind
between affective commitment to the organization and job performance are
(Randall, 1990). Given prior research findings, a nonsignificant relationship b
commitment and performance in any one study is not an unusual occurrenc
commitment is related to job performance in some studies and not in others, how
unclear. Perhaps there are boundary conditions to consider, with prior res
occupational and organizational variables associated with status hierarchies
tional level), as possible moderator variables (cf. Vardi, Wiener and Popper, 1989).
too small and too homogeneous to test for moderator effects, but this is an area fo
Continuance commitment to the organization was also unrelated to job p
present, not enough studies of continuance commitment to the organization with
are not confounded with affective commitment to the organization are available
Allen, 1984) to reach a definite conclusion about its relationship with job perform
are necessary to determine if meta-analysis will produce a corrected significant,
tion between continuance commitment to the organization and job performan
might be of some interest to study whether the negative influence of continuan
the organization on job performance is restricted to task proficiency or whether it
unacceptable performance in organizations. Although our findings suggest t
further testing of this relationship seems desirable.
In considering the implications of our findings for commitment theory, the pr
which work-related commitment influences performance seems relevant. It is no
mechanisms underlying proposed linkages between commitment and job perf
received that much attention. Rather, emphasis is on establishing relationships, s
given hypothesis is disconfirmed, the efficacy of the commitment variable being
called into question. This is problematic because simple tallies of the number of s
particular form of commitment is (or is not) related to job performance ar

underlying processes can be masked. That is, understanding why a particular for
ment was (or was not) related to job performance is as important as studying if
Wiener and Vardi's (1980) model of the commitment-performance relationship
to this issue in that it provides a basis for addressing why questions. As d
commitment is thought to influence job performance through two factors-e
ment. Theory has emphasized the effort factor (cf. Mowday et al., 1982) so that
been cast as a variable with motivational underpinnings. That is, commitment is
one to action (i.e. on behalf of an organization, because of immersion in work, et
body of literature, however, seems to be telling us that this is not the case. The
commitment research appears to be that if commitment has an effort-driv
component, that component is small.
If attention is shifted from effort to the second element in Wiener and Vardi'
attachment-a different perspective emerges. As opposed to driving behav
attachment suggests that commitment directs behavior. The argument is
properties that define each form of work-related commitment provide som
individuals remain attached to some entity (i.e. organization, career) which, in tu
indication of one's preferred work behaviors (i.e. those which support the organi
one's career, etc.). Commitment, therefore, can be viewed as 'directing' be
preferred tasks.
In addition to its focus, the type of work-related commitment under considera
have some bearing on how commitment might direct behavior in organizations. F
to refer to the object of commitment (e.g. organization, job) while type refers t
the psychological state1. For example, Meyer, Allen and Smith (1993) suggest
commitment, like organizational commitment, can be affective, cost-based,
nature. This 'typology of types' seems relevant to all foci of work-related comm
provide some clues about if and how commitment directs or shapes perfor
behaviors in organizations.
Viewing our findings in light of this typology provides some issues for future s
The conceptualization and operationalization of career commitment used here is c
an affective variable (cf. Blau, 1989). In contrast, job commitment was con
operationalized as a cognitive state that does not have an effective componen
A case can be made, however, that this variable has a normative componen
orientation toward work (cf. Lefkowitz and Somers, 1982). Taken as a set, then, o
findings suggest that commitment variables that are affective in nature might d
toward task proficiency while commitment with foci tied more closely to w
influence altruistic behavior in organizations. Of course, this proposition is high
this point, but it does seem to be an interesting area for future studies of work
ment in general and organizational commitment in particular.
In any event, multidimensional models of both commitment and job performan
for future research on this topic. Further testing of these propositions involves
of commitment across multiple, distinct facets of performance, a research strateg
recent interest in commitment profiles (cf. Allen and Meyer, 1990; Becker a
This study represents an early step in what might prove to be a promising direc
ment research.
I We are grateful to one of the anonymous reviewers for this insight.
References
Allen, N. and Meyer, J. (1990). 'The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative
commitment to organizations', Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.
Astin, W. (1964). 'Criterion centered research', Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24, 807-822.
Ayree, S. and Tan, K. (1992). 'Antecedents and outcomes of career commitment', Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 40, 288-305.
Becker, H. (1960). 'Notes on the concept of commitment', American Journal of Sociology, 66, 32-42.
Becker, T. and Billings, R. (1993). 'Profiles of commitment: an empirical test', Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 14, 177-190.
Blau, G. (1989). 'Testing the generalizability of a career commitment measure and its impact on turnover',
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 3, 88-103.
Blau, G., Paul and St. John, N. (1993). 'On developing a general index of work commitment', Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 42, 298-314.
Borman, W. (1990). 'Job behavior, performance and effectiveness'. In: Dunnette, M. and Hough, L. (Eds)
Handbook of Industrial-Organizational Psychology, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Brief, A. and Motowidlo, S. (1986). 'Prosical organizational behaviors', Academy of Management Review,
11, 710-725.
Buchanan, B. (1974). 'Building organizational commitment: the socialization of managers in work
organizations', Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 533-546.
Campbell, J. (1986). Improving the Selection, Classification and Utilization of Army Enlisted Personnel, ARI
Technical Report No. 813101, US Army Research Institute, Alexandria, VA.
Cohen, J. and Cohen, P. (1983). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral
Sciences, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Cohen, A. and Lowenberg, G. (1990). 'A re-examination of the side-bet theory as applied to organizational
commitment: a meta-analysis', Human Relations, 43, 1015-1050.
Greenhaus, J. (1973). 'A factor investigation of career salience', Journal of Vocational Behavior, 3, 95-98.
Guildford, J. and Fruchter, B. (1973). Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education, McGraw-Hill,
New York.
Hackett, R., Bycio, P. and Hausdorf, P. (1994). 'Further assessments of Meyer and Allen's (1991) three
component model of commitment', Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 15-23.
Kanungo, R. (1979). 'The concepts of alienation and involvement revisited', Psychological Bulletin, 86,
119-138.
Konovsky, M. and Cropanzano, R. (1991). 'Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor
employee attitudes and behavior', Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 698-707.
Lefkowitz, J. and Somers, M. (1982). 'Work alienation-involvement: scale construction, validation an
developmental model'. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychologica
Association, Washington, D.C.
Lefkowitz, J., Somers, M. and Weinberg, K. (1984). 'The role of need salience and/or need level
moderators of the relationship between need satisfaction and work alienation-involvement', Journal
Vocational Behavior, 24, 142-158.
London, M. (1983). 'Toward a theory of career motivation', Academy of Management Review, 8, 620-
Mathieu, J. and Zajac, D. (1990). 'A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates
consequences of organizational commitment', Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.
Mayer, R. and Schoorman, D. (1992). 'Predicting participation and production outcomes through
two-dimensional model of organizational commitment', Academy of Management Journal, 35,
671-684.
Meyer, J. and Allen, N. (1984). 'Testing the "side-bet theory" of organizational commitment: so
methodological considerations', Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 372-378.
Meyer, J. and Allen, N. (1991). 'A three component conceptualization of organizational commitme
Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89.
Meyer, J., Allen, N. and Gellatly, I. (1990). 'Affective and continuance commitment to the organiza
evaluation of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-lagged relations', Journal of App
Psychology, 75, 710-720.
Meyer, J., Allen, N. and Smith, C. (1993). 'Commitment to organizations and occupations: extension
three component conceptualization', Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.
Meyer, J., Paunonen, S., Gellatly, I., Goffin, R. and Jackson, D. (1989). 'Organization
job performance: it's the nature of commitment that counts', Journal of Applied Psych
Morita, J., Lee, T. and Mowday, R. (1993). 'The regression-analog to survival analy
application to turnover research', Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1430-1464.
Morrow, P. (1983). 'Concept redundancy in organizational research: the case of wo
Academy of Management Review, 8, 486-500.
Morrow, P. and McElroy, J. (1986). 'On assessing measures of work commitment', Jour
Behavior, 7, 139-145.
Mowday, R., Steers, R. and Porter, L. (1982). Employee- Organization Linkages, Academi
Organ, D. (1988). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome, H
MA.
Porter, L., Steers, R., Mowday, R. and Boulian, P. (1974). 'Organizational commitment, job satisfaction
and turnover among psychiatric technicians', Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 603-609.
Rabinowitz, S. and Hall, D. (1977). 'Organizational research on job involvement', Psychological Bulletin,
84, 265-288.
Randall, D. (1990). 'The consequences of organizational commitment: methodological investigation',
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 361-378.
Randall, D. and Cote, J. (1991). 'Interrelationships among work commitment constructs', Work and
Occupations, 18, 194-211.
Randall, D., Fedor, D. and Longenecker, C. (1990). 'The behavioral expression of organizational commit-
ment', Journal of Vocational Behavior, 36, 210-224.
Reichers, A. (1985). 'A review and reconceptualization of organizational commitment', Academy of
Management Review, 10, 465-476.
Smith, C., Organ, D. and Near, J. (1983). 'Organizational citizenship behavior: its nature and antecedents',
Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-883.
Steers, R. (1977). 'Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment', Administrative Science
Quarterly, 22, 46-56.
Takeshi, A. (1984). 'Tobit models: a survey', Journal of Econometrics, 24, 3-61.
Vardi, Y., Wiener, Y. and Popper, M. (1989). 'The value content of organization mission as a factor in the
commitment of members', Psychological Reports, 65, 27-34.
Wiener, Y. and Vardi, Y. (1980). 'Relationships between job organization and career commitments and
work outcomes: an integrative approach', Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 26, 81-96.
Wood, D. (1974). 'Effect of worker orientation on job attitude correlates', Journal of Applied Psychology,
59, 54-60.

Work-Related Commitment and Job Performance: It's Also the Nature of Performance That Counts

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Work-Related Commitment and Job Performance: It's Also the Nature of Performance That Counts

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Work-Related Commitment and Job Performance: It's also the Nature of the Performance

Work-related commitment and job

MARK JOHN SOMERSl* AND DEE BIRNBAUM2

CCC 0894-3796/98/060621-14$17.50 Received 10 August 1995

increasingly viewed as a constellation of attitudinal variables tied to specific foci

Conceptual and empirical linkages between

Proposed linkages between commitment and job performance were initial

Sample and procedures

keeping with the conceptual definition of this variable, interviews with s

Performance that is detrimental to organizations Following Borman (1990), performance that is

Table 1. Means, standard deviations and correlations among study variables

1. Job commitment 2.92 0.69

Table 2. Regression analyses: work-related commitment and job performance

Facets of job performance Pearson OLS OLS estimates with Tobit

Facet 1: Task proficiency

Facet 2: Extra role performancet

In addition, and as anticipated, job commitment was related only to perf

particular form of commitment is (or is not) related to job performance ar

I We are grateful to one of the anonymous reviewers for this insight.

S-ar putea să vă placă și