This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYEES’ PERCEPTIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND THEIR BEHAVIORAL OUTCOMES: ASSESSING A COGNITIVE PROCESS TO IN-ROLE PERFORMANCE BEHAVIOR AND INTENTION TO LEAVE
Seçil BAL TAŞTAN Marmara University, Turkey
The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between organizational culture and behavioral outcomes of healthcare employees working in private health care organizations. It is aimed to understand how the employees’ psychological processes of organizational culture practices impact their in-role performance behaviors in their nursing roles and their intention to leave. This study examines the proposed model that consists of a number of direct positive and negative relationships between the organizational culture aspects and in-role performance behavior and intention to leave. It is proposed that the aspects of organizational culture, i.e. teamwork, training and development, rewards and recognition and communication will be positively related to employees’ inrole performance behaviors and negatively related to intention to leave. The results showed that all dimensions of organizational culture chosen in the study had significant influence on both constructs of employees’ behavioral outcomes. It is observed that organizational culture aspects had positive impact on in-role performance behaviors and negative impact on employees’ intention to leave. Keywords: Organizational Culture, In-Role Performance, Intention to Leave, Health Services, Nursing.
In recent decades, healthcare delivery systems have been reorganized due to the environmental changes, changes in demographics, technology, increased medical costs, and medical staff shortages, etc. It is observed that these organizational changes have significantly affected hospital employees’ work environments (Gifford, Zammuto and Goodman, 2002), working conditions, and overall organizational culture aspects. In particular, hospital restructuring, economic and financial considerations increased performance expectations, and organizational culture change have led to concerns regarding declining morale and performance behaviors of healthcare employees and increasing of their intentions to leave (Acker, 2004; Gillilan, 1997; Lacey and Beck-Warden, 1998; Lu, While and Barriball, 2005; McNeese-Smith, 2001; Taştan, 2011; Caykoylu, Egri, Havlovic and Bradley, 2011). Additionally, these issues become especially important when the significant relationship between healthcare employees’ morale and the quality of patient services (Humphreys, Brunsen and Davis, 2005) are considered. As a result, there has been increased research and managerial interest in discovering ways to improve healthcare employees’ organizational attachment levels and performance behaviors while trying to decrease the current employees’ levels of intention to leave. Despite substantial research on organizational culture, in-role (task) performance behavior and intention to leave in various sectors, this literature still lacks a relational model that could help future researchers and practitioners to build on. Additionally, it is recognized that organizational culture, inrole performance behavior and intention to leave in the nursing context, has been rarely studied in
Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012, December
Turkey. Individual performance behaviors at both the in-role and extra-role constructs have been examined as a major topic in the literature, but the literature has mainly focused on the individual antecedents and has rarely provided evidences of the relationship between organizational characteristics, organizational culture and several other organizational variables. In particular, this study focuses on the two individual outcomes of organizational culture. In-role performance behavior is expected to be the positive individual outcome and intention to leave is expected to be the negative individual outcome of positive organizational culture practices. According to Saeed and Hassan (2000), understanding organizational culture is essential since it is able to influence the thoughts, feelings, interactions and performance in an organization. More recent researches have provided evidences about organizational culture and its relationships with identified outcomes (i.e. job performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, increased turnover and other forms of employee withdrawal). The aim of this paper is to examine the relationship between organizational culture and behavioral outcomes of healthcare employees. It is aimed to understand how the employees’ psychological processes of organizational culture practices impact their in-role performance behaviors in their nursing roles and their intention to leave. To achieve this objective, we use data collected from nurses employed in large hospitals in Istanbul-Turkey. Moreover, we have used a recently developed scale (In-Role Performance Behavior Scale for Nursing Context) for the evaluation of self-reported in-role performance behavior of the nurses. Thus, the another objective of this study is to determine the extent to which the relevant in-role performance behavior scale can be applied across different health care employee groups and over time.
LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL MODEL
Previous research has found organizational culture to be positively related to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job involvement, job stress, job performance, and coping with job tension (e.g. Ricardo and Jolly, 1997; Blegen, 1993; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Meyer and Allen, 1997; Ooi and Arumugam, 2006; Lu et al., 2005; Dığın and Ünsar, 2010 ). Thus, organizational culture has been related to work role behaviors, job attitudes, and a number of work and behavioral outcomes. Based on the preliminary literature study, this research study suggests that organizational culture has determinant roles on the attitudes and behaviors of employees and can have positive or negative effects on individual behavioral outcomes. Thereby, the remainder of this paper is structured as beginning with the section of a review of relevant literature and followed by the section of research design. The initial section provides conceptual definitions and interrelations of the variables of the study. The section also presents the development of theoretical framework and hypotheses developed in this study.
Aspects of Organizational Culture
Organizational culture is the concept that is examined with its relationships with the individuals’ inrole performance behavior and intention to leave in this study. This section reviews the literature on organizational culture relevant to the development of the research model which is tested in this study. It is suggested that one of the eminent themes that is often discussed and debated in the management and business literature is the influence of organizational culture on organizational and individual performance (Chow, Harrison, Mckinnon, and Wu, 2001). Organizational culture is a management philosophy and a way of managing an organization in improving the effectiveness and efficiency of its performance (Kotter and Heskett, 1992; Ooi and Arumugam, 2006). Therefore, understanding organizational culture is essential since it is able to influence the thoughts, feelings, interactions and performance in an organization (Saeed and Hassan, 2000). The understanding of the importance of corporate culture is also evident when most organizations acknowledged the fact that an organization’s well founded culture could contribute to the achievement in every aspect of organizational and individual performance (Flamholtz and Randle, 1998; Koçel, 2007; Zain, Ishak, and Ghani, 2009).
going back to the origin of the concept. and feel in relation to those problems. Stahl.478). Hofstede (1994). assumptions.” Moreover. Jones (2004) defined organizational culture as the set of shared values and norms that control organization members’ interactions with each other and with suppliers. Connolly and Greenberg. Basically. and contextual factors in performance behavior assessment processes (Denhardt and Denhardt. 1981 as cited in Grunberger. On the description of Hofstede (1994). 2005).Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. Bates and Holton have stated that “employee performance is a multidimensional construct. discovered or developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problem of external adaptation and internal integration (Schein. therefore. Aycan. and Kurshid (2000. think. Moynihan and Pandey. 2009). more specifically the organizations’ and employees’ performance and effectiveness. culture has significant impact on various organizational and individual outcomes. and love and need to associate with others. Borna and Stearns. customers. working processes.194) have described organizational culture as “common patterns of beliefs. 2001. 1992). In-Role Performance Behavior The concept of performance has been widely discussed in studies concerning health care organizations and hospitals (Barzelay. “a pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group has learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration. According to the organizational culture literature. Taştan. Based on these arguments. according to Hofstede’s (1994) approach. culture is a pattern of basic assumptions invented. p. “as software of the mind”. Organizational culture involves with social expectations and standards as well as the values and beliefs that individuals hold central and that bind organizational groups (Lawson and Shen. 67 . 2000. behaviors and climate integrating and binding into a coherent whole. It is also stated that it is important to determine whether the measurement objective is to assess performance outcomes or behavior. culture is one of the most powerful and stable forces operating in organizations. However. Ingraham and Moynihan. organizational culture is the main issue which shapes the relations. institutions and organizations”. Yu. However. 2003. Culture is something that is deeper and more stable. the literature on organization culture provides so many definitions for culture. Following Shein’s (1992) and Hoftede’s (1994) approaches.. agreed that culture is the way in which a group of people solves problems. Deller. two aspects of performance over which employees have been controlled are classified as (a) absences. December As Schein (1996) implied. Schein (1992. and with other people outside the organization. Trompenaars (1994).12) described culture as. stated that every human being has the ability to feel fear. Mendonca. Job performance is a work-related outcome that refers to attainment of organizational objectives as measured through evaluation of performance on job related tasks (Sharma. p. to be thought to new members as the correct way to perceive. of which a significant portion is probably not due to illness but rather is volitional in nature (Hammer and Landau. Kanungo. 2006. culture is what someone does with those feelings and how one expresses those psychological reflections. In the related studies. it is seen that culture literature gained more insights with the contributions made by Schein (1992) and Hofstede (1994). p. and decision making and problem solving processes in an organization. sadness. 2000. These values are then being taught to new members in the organization as the correct way to think and feel in relation to these problems. feeling and potential acting. 2011). Moreover. p. the measurement of which varies depending on a variety of factors” (as cited in Armstrong. is patterns of thinking.12). which are learned throughout one’s lifetime and he also implied that culture is always a collective phenomenon. 1998). values and norms of behavior of human groups and represented by societies. 2003. joy. some researchers have criticized performance assessment in the health care sector and argued that most of the studies have ignored personal. social. 2000. which has worked well enough to be considered valid and. 1991 as cited in Grunberger el al. Thus. As it could be understood from these explanations. p. Schein (1992) argued that culture somehow implies rituals.12) and (b) the employee’s level of work effort (Hodson. values. in his book “Riding the Waves of Culture”. Radin. culture.
Thus. 1997. 1988).g. Van Dyne. Van Dyne and LePine. Organ (1988). appropriately interrelated with the repetitive activities of others so as to yield a predictable outcome”. (1995. Katz and Kahn (1966). arguing that employees are more likely to see their specific behavior as inrole.3). thus. 132). respectively. and Schmit (1997) have addressed two reasons that behavior should be more important factor than results in performance models. They argued that. and Facteau. Katz’s (1964) second and third behavioral categories are classified as in -role and extra-role behavior. This argument is grounded on the approach of Katz (1964) studying individual behavior. According to other descriptions. p. Van Dyne et al. 1997. Wayne and Kraimer. p. an absence of in-role behavior normally results in being reprimanded. the results of the relevant study have revealed that there was no collinearity between in-role and extra-role performance behavior constructs. p. 2011). p. Graham and Dienesch. Respectively. whereas extra-role behavior describes discretionary and spontaneous behaviors that go beyond recognized and required job duties (Organ. Bateman and Organ (1983).. a study which has been conducted in Turkish health care context (Taştan. 2008. rather than extra-role. in-role behavior represents role requirements or activities associated with the formal and explicit job descriptions. extra hours. Cho. 1988. Van Dyne and LePine (1998). In that framework. 1994) have pointed out the difficulty in differentiating the two types of behaviors. Katz and Kahn (1966. Williams. in -role behavior is defined as “required or expected behavior” and “the basis of regular and ongoing job performance” (Van Dyne and LePine. Liden. Motowidlo. 1994. 1998. Motowidlo and Van Scotter. Morrison. based on Katz’s categorization. “states or conditions of t hings or people that are changed by performance are also affected by other factors which are not under the individual performer’s control” and “a behavioral focus is necessary to develop a psychological understanding of work performance” (Motowidlo el al. December Regarding the importance of “behavior” in considering the measurement of employee performance.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. 1997. altruistic behavior. Thus. negative financial consequences. and “performance on required duties and responsibilities” (Sparrowe .73). 2011) have pointed out that at the base of individual performance behavior lies in-role and extra-role behaviors and they were examined as two different constructs. “part of one’s job responsibilities” (Mayer and Gavin. Taştan.174) defined role behavior as “the recurring actions of an indi vidual.. Pond.108). behavior. Van Dyne. p. In general. Additionally. “they must carry out their written and expected role assignments”. 2005. As stated by Yap. and “there must be innovative and spontaneous activity in achieving organizational objectives which go beyond the role specification (p. 1994. it can be concluded that in-role behavior is a construct that has been traditionally used to measure job and task performance for the purpose of evaluating employees’ activities that are related to formal job requirements (Borman and Motowidlo. Nacoste. 68 . expectations and stereotypes”. 2004. and McLean-Parks. 2001. 1997. p. “role assignment or formal job requirements” (Williams. based on the conceptualizations and categorizations of Katz (1964). the related literature about employee job performance have suggested two types of performance behaviors as “in-role” and “extra-role”. and donating). it was demonstrated that the two dimensions of individual performance were empirically distinct and independently contribute to an overall construct of individual performance (Taştan. 1998. 2000. 1988. Following Katz’s (1964) categorization of behavior. in-role performance is defined as behaviors required by formal job descriptions and extra-role performance is defined as behaviors that is beneficial to organization and also goes beyond formal requirements (e. Mohr. Borman.280). and Rodriguez. 1995. Katz (1964) addressed three types of employee behaviors that are important factors for an effectively functioning organization including “employees must be induced to enter and remain within the organizational system”. 216) noted that organizational roles f unction to “delineate expected behaviors. negative organizational and individual outcomes or being dismissed. most studies have supported the distinction between in-role and extra-role behavior (Allen. p.g. 2011). p. Werner.320). Facteau. Bove and Beverland (2009. Organ. Motowidlo. employee performance behaviors were classified in terms of in-role performance and extra-role performance. and form the foundation of job descriptions. Based on that argument. they could be considered and examined as two different constructs. Cummings. although some studies (e. Since these two behavior units were somehow linked to each other. With short descriptions. Williams (1988).875). 1994).
2009). p. planning on leaving a job. Du Toit. Boulanger. Breaux. 2004. there are studies that have examined the links between corporate culture and individual work outcomes such as organizational commitment. resources being wasted on continually finding. As a result. According to Mobley’s (1982. p. In Turkey. Lam. and training applicants. Bothma. turnover is “the cessation of membership in an organization by an individual who received monetary compensation from the organization”. 2004). Zain et. Hypotheses Regarding Organizational Culture. 2009. There are several studies which examined the influence of organizational culture perceptions on employee outcomes whether vary according to cultures of the countries. and the desire to leave the job (Lambert and Hogan. and Aryeeet (2002) found that the effects of organizational culture aspects and perception of justice on employee outcomes (i. Hand.1) has mentioned that “high turnover rates can compromis e firm profitability due to high performing employees exiting the organization. p. Accordingly. 1991. In an organization setting. and Rothmann. p. Bartolomucci. The culture theory which is developed by Denison and Mishra (1995) proposed several associations between each factor of culture concept and organizational and individual effectiveness as well as work related individual outcomes. Griffeth.13). especially in the context of health care. Additionally. job performance. Corrigan. behaviors and attitudes. That study was executed in confection sector and the results have revealed that there was a significant relationship 69 .97). Schaubroeck.. and Serroni. intention to leave has been defined as “an individual’s subjective probability that he/she is permanently leaving the employer in the near future and captured the last in a series of withdrawal cognitions that also included thoughts about quitting and the search for alternative employment (Tepper. Herscovitch. and Topolaytsky. This body of literature has identified various dimensions of organizational culture related to organizational and individual performance (such as Meyer and Allen. it is still an important subject since it has connections with various indıvidual and organizational aspects. such kind of an understanding effects employee performance. intention to leave. 2009. Beaumier. and Intention to Leave A large body of the management and business literature has examined the link between organizational culture and individual performance.al. Morris and Leung (2000) observed the relationship between organizational culture aspects and organizational justice perceptions of the employees throughout a research performed across countries. p. Meyer. 2002. 2002. and/or declines in customer satisfaction”. employee turnover is calculated by “dividing the number of employees separated from the organization that they have been working for by the number of the employees working for the organization in that period” (Hammerberg.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. Therefore. 9).10) definitio n. p. and Meglino (1979 as cited in Lambert and Hogan. hiring. Although there has been a wide literature about intention to leave. December Intention to Leave The literature evidences have been indicated that the turnover problem is a considerable issue for all organizations. job satisfaction and absenteeism) were significant among American and Hong Kong Chinese samples. A research study conducted by Ünsar and Karahan (2010) has investigated the relationships between organizational environment factors. Stanley. job satisfaction.97) defined intention to turnover as the cognitive process of thinking of quitting.e. alienation and intention to leave. and positive work outcomes (Appelbaum et al. the subject of intention to leave among employees is fould to be considerable issue to investigate. Carr. Doré. employee performance. satisfaction. Ricardo and Jolly. Hom and Griffeth (1995 as cited in Zimmerman.157). 1997.. it was stated that “the level of turnover is an important indicator of the effectiveness and efficiency of an organization” (Lambert and Hogan. Additionally. Lau and Idris. It was indicated that “employees form an overall subjective perception of organization based on concepts such as organizational culture and job satisfaction and this overall perception becomes an organization’s culture or personality” (Appelbaum. 2009. the definitions have showed that intention to leave is an individual’s own estimated probability that he/she is constantly leaving the organization at some point in the near forthcoming (Van Schalkwky. 2001. 2009). 2010). Girard. p. Hu and Hu. In-Role Performance Behavior. 2006. Geider. Mobley.
Meredith.79) Moreover. expected utility of alternate roles outside the organization. Erez. 1978. job satisfaction was considered a valid predictor of employee intention to leave. job opportunity) and employee orientation (for example. supervisory support. p. Zain et. (1997) have important researches and findings which shown that organizational culture is associated with organizational citizenship behavior. in previous research. work-related factors. personal variables (for example. workplace bullying (Kuşçu. Another study done by Çekmecelioglu (2007) aimed to empirically investigate the impact of organizational culture dimensions (organizational creativity.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. 2009). 1979 as cited in Lee. 2006. 2011). Lau and Idris. perception of leadership (Conger.361). Şahin. and Menon. and Liden. 2000. job satisfaction and intention to leave (Yazıcıoğlu. Brown. Kanungo. 2001. 2000. 2011). Yazicıoğlu. a number of researchers (Batlis. p. Scott. 2009. namely. team support and challenging work) that support creativity on job satisfaction and intentions to leave. p. Somech and Drach-Zahavy (2004) and Wayne. Ooi and Arumugam. and non. 2006. 238) suggested that there were four determinants of the decision to leave: job satisfaction. Gilson and Blum. 1988. environmental variables (for example. Kacmar and Witt. 2002). Croucher. 2005. 2004. 2007. Silverthorne. 2009). Çekmecelioğlu. Chen. discrimination etc. and work environment (such as organizational tasks and reward systems) were three main factors which has impact on the turnover behaviors of employees”. Moreover. In a study done in Finland (Böckerman and Ilmakunnas. Moreover. Dığın ve Ünsar. Schnake and Dumler (2000) studied relationships among perceived equity. job satisfaction.work values and roles. According to the results. Simoens. Muchinsky and Morrow (1980) proposed three primary sets of intention to leave determinants: general economic conditions. 2000. 2007.3) indicated that there was a causality stemming from job satisfaction to employee intention to leave and thus. employee relations. Shore. that study revealed evidence that adverse working conditions were leading to an increase in job dissatisfaction and the latter was the one driving employees’ intention to leave and to search for a new job. organizational identification ( Hatch ve Schultz. spouse’s career and family responsibilities) and (d) individual work-related variables (for example. (1997) demonstrated that employees’ perceptions of a supportive culture in their organizations are positively related to organizational citizenship behavior. Erdem. Oommen. size of ﬁrm and job design). 2000. Akerlof. Rose and Yellen. harm.) were more likely to show intention to leave. (b) organisational variables (for example. 2010. age and gender). 1995 as cited in Gazioglu and Aysıt. Witte. 2002. That model emphasized the role of individual perceptions leading to differences between employees in evaluating their jobs.192) classiﬁed intention to leave variables into four groups. and individual factors. Harris. Wayne et al. such as organizational commitment (Saeed and Hassan. which are. Ongori. overtime. and Sibbald. Zhou. Karia and Ahmad. Mobley. The findings of that research suggested the need for work environment that encourages employees for creativity that are conducive to job satisfaction and intention to leave (Çekmecelioğlu. 2002. Liu and Picken. 1980. expected utility of alternate roles within the organization. (c) individual non-work variables (for example.106) “job characteristics. 2007. Another study conducted in Turkey aimed to determinate the relationship between organizational trust level. Shalley. organizational commitment and intent to leave. organizational commitment and propensity to turnover on male employees in 70 . Furthermore. there are studies that have examined the link between corporate culture and various individual outcomes. 2006. Additionally. 2009. Gordon and DeNisi. 2007. role conﬂict and co-worker support). and Steele. p. 1997. Moreover. job satisfaction and intention to leave of employees (Yazıcıoğlu. job-related variables (for example. 2012). Chris. Long. Mobley (1982) presented four general categories of variables inﬂuencing employee intention to leave.235). A number of studies (Freeman. p. organizational citizenship behavior (LePine. 2004) it was shown that employees facing adverse working conditions (in terms of wage. Çavuş and Gürdoğan. 2011 ) studying intention to leave have been interested in the determinants of employees’ intention to leave. Iverson (1999 as cited in Du. December between employees with a sense of alienation in a certain organizational setting and employee intention to leave (Ünsar and Karahan. unemployment level and inﬂation). expectations and abilities). a significant correlation was found between organizational trust. 2009. It has been found that (Szilagyi. Wang and Dadura. 2009. and Johnson. 2010. 2008. 2005. Gravella. p. atmosphere. (a) the state of the economy (for example. Polat and Meydan. Another model developed by Mobley (1977. 1982. the variables aﬀecting turnover have been classiﬁed into several categories.al. Gül and Aykanat. p.
On the othe r side. December a medium size ﬁrms in the construction industry. training and development (Karia and Ahmad. However. gender and education). Another study which was performed in Turkish tourism context examined the relationship between leader-member exchange and intention to quit (Şahin. Acton and Golden. 2001. However. A study of Ooi and Arumugam (2006) found that teamwork. proactive planning. Lambert. It was also found that satisfaction with a supervisor signiﬁcantly and positively inﬂuenced intention to leave (Du et al.277). training and development. 2011). Anderson. rewarding and recognition programs. training and development. 2002) and rewards and recognition (Zain et. Karia and Ahmad (2000) examined the effect of teamwork as a dimension of organizational culture on organizational commitment and found significant relationship between these two variables. 2008). 2000. As further. negative relation between job stress and organizational intention to leave (Dığın and Ünsar. Besides. and Gaertner (2000) and Chen. Additionally. rewards and recognition. organizational learning expands employees’ perspectives. 2010). effective decision-making. age. Thus. and job satisfaction. Besides. an empirical research also indicated a consistent and inverse relationship between overall job satisfaction and intention to leave (Pitts. it is seen that the research findings about significant impact of organizational culture on employees’ in -role performance behaviors and their intentions to leave are limited. a study conducted in Turkish food sector analyzed organizational commitment in pleasure of employee’s job security. 2009). it was found that work environment variables would not have a direct effect on turnover intent but instead would have indirect effects through job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Lambert and Hogan. According to analyses of that study. 1982. 2006). Zain et. relations with co-workers and autonomy as being the determinants of employees’ intention to leave. Zain et.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. Zain et. working stress and effects to intention to leave (Dığın and Ünsar. Thus. and helps them to exhibit better performance behaviors. communication (Myers and Myers. Iverson (1999) indicated that job satisfaction. Karia and Asaari. four important dimensions of organizational culture are teamwork (Karia and Ahmad. gender and leader-member exchange explained a meaningful portio n of intention to leave (Şahin. The analysis revealed a significant negative relationship between leader-member exchange and intention to leave. Hom. supervision. Lau and Idris. As it is seen. Supporting that result. performance behaviors and intention to leave include communication. organizational commitment. 2000. there was a positive relation between employee’s pleasure of their job security and organizational commitment. communication) and job attitude (job involvement) and indicated that intention to leave is signiﬁcantly associated with those factors. p. organizational commitment. Marvel and Fernandez.al. 2006.al. task variety. 2009). financial regards. based on Lambert and Hogan’s model (2008). Hogan and Barton (2001) have specified five dimensions of work environment measured are role conflict. 2011. these studies were often conducted in a non-Turkish setting and not in health care sector.. 2010. and Bliese (2011) also revealed that job satisfaction was negatively associated with intention to leave. 2009). p. teamwork and fairness and consistency in management practices (Ricardo and Jolly. risk taking for creativity and innovation. Most of the results examining these dimensions found significant influences on organizational and individual performance. organizational aspects such as workplace environment and intent to leave have a signiﬁcant inﬂuence on employee turnover activities. Moreover. Ployhart. Within these dimensions. 2011). teamwork. Koh and Goh (1995) studied on demography (for example. it is recognized that most of the studies about organizational culture were focused on organizational performance. studies done by Griffeth. job satisfaction (for example. co-workers and ﬁnancial rewards.133). the current study focuses on the assumption of the crucial relationship between these concepts by paying attention to specific 71 . Thomas.al. Somech and Drach-Zahavy (2004) indicated that organizational learning creates an environment in which employees lead their focus from the immediate outcomes of their performance to continuous learning by the organization as a whole. 2009). rewards and recognition and communication dimensions of organizational culture significantly influence organizational and individual performance. 1997.al. the literature evidences about the links between organizational culture. encourages them to be the organizational members.
a negative. training and development. Consequently. it is seen that previous studies about the relationship between organizational culture and individual performance are mostly focused on the concepts of job performance or organizational citizenship behavior as work performance predictors rather than in-role performance behavior. December characteristics of organizational culture. such as teamwork. 1964. direct relationship is expected between individuals’ perception of organizational culture aspects and in-role performance behaviors. Denison and Mishra. 2006. However. Research Model of this Study Organizational Culture Teamwork Training and development • Communication • Rewards and recognition • • H1 (+) In-role Performance Behavior H2 (-) Intention to Leave RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This study focuses on corporate culture and its impact on employees’ behavioral outcomes. and performance (Adams. communication. direct relationship is expected between individuals’ perception of organizational culture aspects and intention to leave. and (d) rewards and recognition influence individuals’ in-role performance behavior and intention to leave. a positive. Thus. Thereby. Bolino. this section provides the research design with the brief information related to the research sample and research instruments. the early hypothesized relationships of the study involving organizational culture construct. the following hypotheses are generated for the purpose of this study. Organ.. Motowidlo et al. Blau. training and development. productivity. such as economic exchanges. This study examines these aspects by conducting a questionnaire survey. 2009). According to social exchange theory. in this study. (c) communication.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. and Organ (1988). rewarding and recognition will exhibit higher levels of in-role performance behavior and lower levels of intention to leave. 1965. 72 . it is expected that employees who feel that they are supported by their organizations would tend to perform more in-role behaviors and would tend to have less intention to leave their organization. 1995. the current study suggests that individuals with perceptions of organizational culture fostering teamwork. Figure 1. Specifically.. 1999. in-role performance behavior and intention to leave are presented with the following research model (Figure 1). in-role performance behavior and intention to leave on the basis of theoretical roots derived from culture theory. Social exchange theory states that an individual expects social justice and reciprocity to dominate interpersonal transactions. Additionally. Katz and Kahn (1966). Zain et al. rewarding and recognition.. and conceptualization of in-role performance behavior (Katz. In this context. To summarize. H1: In Turkish health care organizations. the employee performance is specifically examined with the construct of in-role performance behavior based on the conceptualizations and categorizations of Katz (1964). 1964. social exchange theory. (b) training and development. it has been supposed that it would be worthy to evaluate the associations among the organizational culture. 1977). communication. 1997. this study is designed in order to see whether (a) teamwork. H2: In Turkish health care organizations. Organ et al.
578% and the overall reliability of the scale was confirmed with an Alpha value of . age. teamwork. As the factor analysis results showed. “patient specific nursing and provident care activities”. As a result of that study.82. (b) Nursing Service Control and Development. Taştan’s (2011) “In-Role Performance Behavior Scale-Nursing Context” composed of 6 dimensions with totally 39 items was used. (c) Patient Specific Nursing and Provident Care Activities. (e) Patient Care Planning and Registration Activities. December Sample Selection This study uses employees (nurses) of all clinics and departments in private owned hospitals in Istanbul-Turkey. There is not researcher interference. and communication. “reception and orientation activities”. reward and recognition. Each of the dimensions of organizational culture is measured with 8 items and these dimensions were training and development. d) 3 items related to reception and orientation activities. To measure “in-role performance behaviors”. For the selection of respondents there is not an age limitation for the sample. that original scale is used in order to measure the respondents’ self -report inrole performance behaviors and also to reevaluate the reliability and validity of the scale. and “patient visits and doctor informing activities”. Questions in the last section are asked in categorical form. The forth and last section requests the respondents’ demographic profile such as gender. The questionnaire consists of four sections. the nurses’ in -role performance behaviors were categorized into 6 dimensions with an explained variance of 98. and tenure in the work field. (2009). The second section asks the respondents to respond to items related to “in-role performance behaviors” with their self assessments. The third section measures “intention to leave” and requests the respondents to complete the 4 items which were adapted from Rosin and Korabik’s (1995) turnover intention scale. (d) Reception and Orientation Activities. number of children. e) 3 items related to patient care planning and registration activities. “patient care planning and registration activities”. Thus. The findings of the qualitative study were again tested with multiple source method with the participation of 600 nurses and 350 doctors working in different private hospitals in Istanbul-Turkey. Study setting is non-contrived. The first section measures “organizational culture” and requests the respondents to complete the 32 items which were adapted from the study of Zain et al. (a) General Nursing Process and Communication Activities. unit of analysis is individuals and time horizon of the study is cross-sectional. The questionnaire has been used in the studies of Tanrıöver (2005) and Menişa (2006) and the Turkish version of the scale was controlled by the researcher of this study with the collaboration of her colleague during the preparation of the questionnaire form. in this study. tenure in the current hospital.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. Questionnaire Design The questionnaire used in this study is developed by adapting scales for each of the variables of the research model with some modifications to suit the context of this study. c) 4 items related to patient specific nursing and provident care activities. and (f) Patient Visits and Doctor Informing Activities. f) 3 items related to patient visits and doctor informing activities). “nursing service control and development”. The time limit of six month was extended to one year in order to better serve the purpose of the study. the extracted dimensions of self-report in-role performance behavior were. this variable is measured with respondents’ self -reports concerning their evaluations of in-role behaviors related to nursing context. This original in-role performance behavior scale was developed throughout a qualitative study and with a multiple source method with the participation of both nurses (subjective self-report) and doctors (objective supervisorreport). These include “general nursing process and communication activities”. Therefore. b) 4 items related to nursing service control and development. marital status. 73 . The second section measuring “in-role performance behaviors” requests the respondents to complete 39 items (a) 22 items related to general nursing process and communication activities.
Table 1 also shows that the respondents provide the highest mean score for “training and development” (3. The respondents were approached by the researcher at their working clinics or departments. The hospitals were located in different regions of Istanbul. In Table 1. The results are shown in Table 1. In this study.9229) and “patient specific nursing and provident care” (3. The “intention to leave” variable is assessed by 4 items and the respondents are asked to provide their responses using a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Moreover. At last. inrole performance behavior and intention to leave. The questionnaires were hand-collected by the researcher within 2-3 days and some of the respondents preferred to fill the questionnaire via internet.6682). the respondents provide the lower means scores for “reception and orientation” (3. The mean scores of the 39 variables related to in-role performance behaviors are used as an indication of the level of in-role performance. December Data Collection Approximately three hundred and eighty questionnaires were distributed to the private hospitals’ nurses in different departments/clinics.7497. Research Construct The dimensions of “organizational culture” are evaluated by way of a series of items that require participants to indicate. rewards and recognition and training and development.8385) and “communication” (3.5112) respectively. Each hospital and each department were distributed 380 questionnaires. As a result of 2 months work. RESULTS Descriptive Statistics and Reliabilities This section of the study presents the descriptive statistics of the dimensions of corporate culture. The results indicate that most respondents have low intention to leave for their job and organization.5066). the respondents provide the lowest mean score for “rewards and recognition” (3. 74 . to evaluate the level of “in-role performance behavior” of the nurses.8865).9130. the respondents are asked to rate the degree of in-role performance behavior using a 5-point scale of 1 (never) to 5 (always). the responses to questions in each dimension are aggregated and an average response was calculated as a score to represent the respondent assessment of the dimensions. communication. 300 nurses from 11 hospitals volunteered to participate in the study and filled the questionnaire.9220) followed by “teamwork” (3. 6 points were from “always” to “never” and additionally 1 point was added by the researcher named as “this is not my task” (for detailed information Taştan. The results indicate that most respondents have high in-role performance towards their job and organization. The results show the mean score for “organizational culture” is 3. using a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). the items have been measured with 7 points scale.9775) followed by “service control and development” (3. The results indicate that most respondents have high perceptions of cultural aspects towards their organization. It is also seen that the respondents provide the highest mean score for “general nursing process and communication” (3. their opinions of teamwork.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. In the original form of the “in-role performance behavior” scale.7320). The respondents were encouraged to complete the questionnaire on the spot or to return the questionnaire after 2-3 days. Additionally. totally 300 questionnaires were successfully completed and collected. Table 1 shows that the mean score for “intention to leave” is 2. However. it is also seen that the mean score for “in-role performance behavior” is 3. 2011). This led to a total sample of 300. For each respondent.8148.7560) and “patient visits and doctor informing” (3. The lowest mean score provided by the respondents are “patient care planning and registration” (3.
Therefore.927 .535 0.8385 3.000. training and development (0.6682 3. In-Role Performance and Intention to Leave Variable In-Role Performance Behaviors General nursing process and communication Service control and development Patient specific nursing and provident care Reception and orientation Patient visits and doctor informing Patient care planning and registration Intention to Leave Organizational Culture Training and development Teamwork Communication Rewards and Recognition Mean Score 3. 75 . The results showed that the reliability for teamwork is 0.9130 3. hypothesis 1-1 is accepted. direct relationship is expected between individuals’ perception of organizational culture aspects and in -role performance behaviors) and the sub-hypotheses of H1-1 to H1-4.918 and reliability for intention to leave based on all 4 items is 0.8865 3.535 0.840. Teamwork and In-Role Performance Behavior Teamwork r p N r p N Teamwork 1 300 0.898).5066 Series of factors and reliability tests were performed before testing the hypotheses and performing regression analysis.906) as being the dimensions of organizational culture. Influence of Teamwork on In-Role Performance Behavior Hypothesis 1-1 states that “a positive.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012.9229 3. December Table 1. Influence of Organizational Culture on In-Role Performance Behavior This section presents the results of testing hypothesis 1 (a positive. This finding is also consistent with Zain et al. r=0.5112 2.000 300 1 300 In-Role Performance The results show that there is a significant and moderate relationship between teamwork dimension of organizational culture and in-role performance behavior (p=0.7497 3. (2009).901) and rewards and recognition (0.7560 3. The hypotheses are tested using Pearson’s correlation. Table 2. direct relationship is expected between individuals’ perce ption of teamwork and in-role performance behaviors. Table 2 presents the results of testing hypothesis 1-1.9220 3.8148 3. Such results are consistent with Morrow (1997) and Osland (1997) and the results indicate that teamwork is important in employees’ ability to complete a task with the members of the group.000 300 In-Role Performance 0. The results also showed that the reliability for in-role performance behaviors based on 38 items is 0.7320 3.9775 3.535). The results indicate that all variables in this study are reliable. Descriptive Statistics of Organizational Culture. communication (0.
Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012.572 0.000 300 1 300 In-Role Performance The results show that there is a significant and strong relationship between communication dimension of organizational culture and in-role performance behavior (p=0. (2011). Zain et al. 76 . direct relationship is expected between individuals’ perception of communication and in-role performance behaviors.572 0. according to the results. Therefore. Training and Development and In-Role Performance Behavior Training Development and r p N r p N Training and Development 1 300 0. hypothesis 1-3 is supported. it can be suggested that the organization which provides training and development to their employees would lead to higher task accomplishment and in-role performance. December Influence of Training and Development on In-Role Performance Behavior Hypothesis 1-2 states that “a positive. The results indicate that communication is a strong dimension of corporate culture that is in relation to individuals’ in -role performance behaviors. The results imply that communication is important in enhancing employees to do their task roles which were required by their jobs and in turn influences in-role performance behaviors. Table 4 presents the results of testing hypothesis 1-3. Communication and In-Role Performance Behavior Communication r p N r p N Communication 1 300 0.000 300 In-Role Performance 0. r=0. direct relationship is expected between individuals’ perception of training and development and in-role performance behaviors. The results show that there is a significant and moderate relationship between training and development and in role performance behavior ( p=0. Thus.724 0. Table 4. r=0.000. Therefore.724). This finding is also consistent with Taştan’s (2011) study which has demonstrated a significant relationship between amicable relations in the organization and individuals’ in-role performance behavior.000 300 1 300 In-Role Performance Table 3 presents the results of testing hypothesis 1-2.724 0. Caykoylu et al. 2006.000. Table 3.000 300 In-Role Performance 0. Table 3 presents the results of testing hypothesis 1-2. Influence of Communication on In-Role Performance Behavior Hypothesis 1-3 states that “a positive. The findings are consistent with the evidences of previous studies (Karia and Asaari. Hypothesis 1-2 is supported.572). 2009) which have indicated that proper training and development facilities enable employees to do their job correctly and enhances them to feel encouraged. Such result is consistent with James and James (1989) and Westerman and Yamamura (2007).
000. Additionally. Organizational Culture and Intention to Leave Organizational Culture r p N r p N Organizational Culture 1 300 -0. such a finding is also consistent with Yazıcıoğlu’s (2009) findings that implied the significant negative relationship between organization 77 . this result is consistent with O’Driscoll and Randall (1999) and Zain et al. training and development. organizational culture is taken as a total variable of four dimensions (teamwork.277 0.000 300 1 300 In-Role Performance The results show that there is a significant and weak relationship between rewards and recognition dimension of organizational culture and in-role performance behavior (p=0. recognition.488). Table 6. autonomy etc. The previous results imply that rewards and recognition have important roles in improving employees’ motivation at work and results with positive work outcomes such as task accomplishment and commitment. rewards and recognition).277). Table 6 presents the results of testing hypothesis 2.488 0. r=-0.000 300 1 300 Intention to Leave The results show that there is a weak and negative correlation between organizational culture aspects and intention to leave (p=0. such finding is consistent with Deci and Ryan’s (2000) study which has indicated the significant association between intrinsic-extrinsic motivation factors (rewarding.000 300 In-Role Performance 0. Thus. direct relationship is expected between individuals’ perception of organizational culture aspects and intention to leave. Such results are consistent with Guchait and Cho (2010) who have implied the negative relationship between human resource management practices and intention to leave of employees in the service industry in India and supports the findings of Masroor and Fakir’s (2009) study which has demonstrated the nega tive association between job satisfaction and intent to leave among Malaysian nurses.) and individual’s work performance.488 0. r=0. direct relationship is expected between individuals’ perception of rewards and recognition and in-role performance behaviors. Additionally. (2009) who implied that rewards offered by an organization would have a positive effect on employees’ commitment towards their work. In testing the hypothesis 2 by using Pearson’s correlation.000.277 0. Rewards and Recognition and In-Role Performance Behavior Rewards and Recognition r p N r p N Rewards and Recognition 1 300 0. hypothesis 1-3 is accepted. December Influence of Rewards and Recognition on In-Role Performance Behavior Hypothesis 1-4 states that “a positive. The results indicate that rewards and recognition is a weak dimension of corporate culture that is in relation to individuals’ in-role performance behaviors specific to the current research sample.000 300 Intention to Leave -0. Therefore.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. Table 5. communication. Table 5 presents the results of testing hypothesis 1-4. Influence of Organizational Culture on Intention to Leave This section presents the results of testing hypothesis 2 which states that a negative.
631. job satisfaction and quit intentions of Turkish employees in accommodations operations.405. a multiple regression analysis was performed.000 In-Role Performance Behaviors Beta 0.415 0.000.279 0.068).175 > 0.000 t value -4. p = 0. 78 . In the next stage. Table 8.889 1.4% of the variance in intention to leave and “communication” dimension has the highest significant negative influence in this relationship (p=0.347 -0.566 -4.396 -0.284 -0. p = 0.851 -3. Table 7 presents the results.175 Dimensions of organizational culture explain 55.000 0. R2 = 0.000.000 0.658 6.409.000 0. hypothesis 2 is accepted.000 Dimensions of organizational culture explain 32.000 0. to provide further understanding on the influence of the four dimensions of organizational culture on intention to leave. The results in table 8 shows that the four dimensions of organizational culture contribute 32.355 p value 0. Therefore. R2 = 0.088 -4. Table 8 presents the results.365 0. β=-0. to provide further understanding on the influence of the four dimensions of organizational culture on individuals’ in-role performance behaviors.000 0.068 t value 5. Table 7. Multiple Regression Analysis for Dimensions of Organizational Culture and Intention to Leave Dependent Variable: Independent Variables Teamwork Training and Development Communication Rewards and Recognition R = 0. again a multiple regression analysis was performed. December trust. Intention to Leave Beta -0.077 6.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. β=0. Further Analysis: Multiple Regressions Initially.555. Among the four dimensions of organizational culture.324.000 0.4% in influencing intention to leave negatively. communication has the most important influence on in-role performance behaviors (p=0.5% of the variance in in-role performance behaviors and “rewards and recognition” dimension has not a statistically significant influence in this relationship with the p value of 0. F = 91.415).5% in influencing in-role performance behaviors. Multiple Regression Analysis for Dimensions of Organizational Culture and In-Role Performance Behaviors Dependent Variable: Independent Variables Teamwork Training and Development Communication Rewards and Recognition R = 0.05 (β=0.544 p value 0. The results in table 7 shows that the four dimensions of organizational culture contribute 55.446.295 F = 35.396).
2006. Deci and Ryan. Çekmecelioğlu. Therefore. It is supposed that this study’s results confirmed the reliability of the scale of in-role performance behaviors and contribute to the field of job performance measurement studies in nursing context. Rotenberry and Moberg. 2011) that signify the importance of these dimensions on employees’ performance at work. 2007. in-role performance behavior and intention to leave. 2009. this study has some limitations. At last. 2009. In summary. It is seen that the aspects of organizational culture had positive impact on in-role performance behaviors and negative impact on employees’ intention to leave. Ooi and Arumugam. Zain et al. The key finding in this study is Turkish private hospitals’ organizational culture practices are positive towards employees’ (nurses) exhibition of in-role performance behaviors and do not come into existence of intentions to leave. intention to leave and several other individual outcomes. Therefore. Secondly. training and development. However. 79 . the respondents of this study are only 300 nurses working in those hospitals and it is suggested that future study could be performed using a larger sample size. namely teamwork. and reward and recognition and their relationships with employees’ (nurses) in-role performance behaviors and intention to leave their organization. The results are consistent to the results of previous studies (such as Currivan. Caykoylu et al. First. Burney. Ünsar and Karahan.. Yazıcıoğlu. 2004. this study used a cross sectional questionnaire survey approach focusing on eleven Turkish private owned hospitals in located in Istanbul. Therefore. Specifically. this in turn would affect the organization’s performance. this study also utilizes a self-report original scale of Taştan (2011) and evaluates its reliability by testing it on the sample of nurses on different organizational setting. This situation brings up the suggestion that the positive perceptions of organizational culture practices would lead to higher in-role performance and lower level of intention to leave. other health care organizations are encouraged to practice these dimensions of organizational culture in yielding better individual and organizational results. the findings in this study provide some understanding on the importance of organizational culture aspects and practices on individuals’ in-role performance behaviors and their intention to leave.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. 2000. This study provides knowledge on the influence of organizational culture aspects implemented in a health care organization. December CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This study examines the influence of organizational culture on two specific employee behavioral outcomes. 2007. 2010. 1999. communication. Henle and Widener.. the findings in this study may not be able to generalize to other health care organizations and both private and public hospitals. this study has a difference as it uses an original recently developed in-role performance behaviors scale specifically concerning the nursing context. 2009. this study examines four dimensions of organizational culture. Somech and Drach-Zahavy. The results show that all dimensions of organizational culture chosen in this study have significant influence on both constructs of in-role performance behaviors and intention to leave.
Appelbaum. Borman. M. G. M. Böckerman. 1. and Facteau.. A. “Örgüt İkliminin İş Tatmini ve İşten Ayrılma Niyeti Üzer indeki Etkisi:Bir Araştırma”. W. (1983). Çekmecelioğlu. C. N. (1964).495.G. (1988). Ş. G.. Adams. pp. Batlis. J. “Key organizational commitment antecedents for nurses.. In L. Conference proceedings. Armstrong M. and Gürdoğan. paramedical professionals and non-clinical staff”. Caykoylu. Akerlof. (1997). Allen.. Facteau. E. pp. London.M. 42(1).104. pp. 6573. “Job switching and job satisfaction in the U. Boulanger. C. (2004).job search: Is there a nexus?” NBER Discussion Paper. Deller. S. “Job disamenities. Y. Wiley.. Exchange and power in social life. Academy of Management Journal.. M. and Motowidlo.. “Impact of Culture on Human Resource Management Practices: A 10 -Country Comparison”. and Ilmakunnas.. CA: University of California Press.. Çavuş. (2004). J. (2002). S.. “The effect of organizational conditions (role conflict.S. C. Nursing Research. Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. P. pp. pp. December REFERENCES Acker. (2003).99-109. Doré. pp. E. Kogan Page. UK.233-240. Informing Science. 40(2). (1980). 2 (pp. and Kurshid A. D. ½.82-98. Beaumier. C. I.. Management Decision. M. 7-33. 80 . “Inequity in social Exchange”. Human Performance. and social support) on job satisfaction and intention to leave among social workers in mental health care”. “Organizational Citizenship Behavior : A Case Study of Culture. Rose. J. Blegen. K. Yu. and the effects of question type”. Acton. (2008). C. “Training: The way to retain valuable IT employees”. D. New York: Academic Press. Havlovic. 36-41.. Corrigan. and on the . and Serroni. 25(1). (2011) . Kanungo. 9(1). and Bradley. T. Aycan. P. “Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors?”. (2007). A. New York. pp. Community Mental Health Journal. (2004). (2002). “Örgüt kültürü ve örgütsel bağlılık ilişkisi: Beş yıldızlı bir otel işletmesi üzerinde araştırma”. Leading with values: The moderating influence of trust on values acceptance by employees. Bateman. M. 36. Stahl. Advances in experimental social psychology. 2.1-24. A.18-34. Mendonca. Florida: National Bureau of Economic Research. G. 26. Berkowitz (Eds. 42. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. Blau. pp. Applied Psychology: An International Review 49(1). Unpublished Doctorate Thesis. Bolino. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity.267-299). pp. A. S. The Pennsylvania State University. “Nurses’ job satisfaction: a meta-analysis of related variables”. S. Journal of Health Organization and Management. and Yellen. W. Leadership and Trust”.).. opportunities for professional development. “Structured interviewing for OCB: Construct validity. P. Z. Egri. pp.. 24(1). (2000). W. pp. H. T. 10. job satisfaction. N. faking. K. pp. T and Golden. The Journal of Psychology. (1993).A. Brown.13-40. labour market”. Bartolomucci..1-12. Berkeley.192-221.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012... Human Performance. pp. pp. “Task performance and contextual perform ance: The meaning of personnel selection research”. C.582. role ambiguity. C.587–595.79-97. (2001). J. 9th Edition. A Handbook of Human resources Management Practice . (1965).. S. N. “The effects of organizational climate on job satisfaction. and Organ. J. Academy of Management Review.. “Job satisfaction and the good solider: The relationship between affect and employee citizenship”. J. 17(1). D. Girard. anxiety and propensity to leave”. R. R. (1999). L. (2004). Barzelay. The new public management: Improving research and policy dialogue. M.
pp. Meredith. Liu. Nursing Economics. 21. R.F. R.. İ. December Chen. Denison. American Economic Review. B. Academy of Management Journal. “Workforce reductions: low morale. Zammuto. moderator tests. Ployhart.135. Cho.. “Charismatic leadership and follower effects”.1-13. 54. (2003). Oxford University Press. pp. Kanungo. 4781). T. 21 (8). M. J. E. P. Journal of Management. and Bliese. and Menon.1228-1247.132-145. 2(2). “A meta -analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: update. L. “The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior”. 81 . C. R. Harrison. An integrative model of empowerment and individual performance under conditions of organizational individualism and collectivism in public sector organizations. D. P. D. R. and research implications for the millennium”. The International Journal of Human Resource Management . Hom. and Mishra A. and Goodman. Gazioglu. B. 68. S. “The relationship between hospital unit culture and nurses’ quality of work life”. “Organizational culture: Associati on with affective commitment. 305-332. “Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness”. Deci.L. S. pp. J. Ö. propensity to remain and information sharing in a Chinese cultural context”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi. State University of New York. M. G. E and Randle. Connolly. (2009). iş stresi ve işten ayrılma niyetine etkisi”. Long.F. and Gaertner. G. Armonk.B. Guchait. Du. Organizational Science.. ERC Working Papers in Economics. Sharpe. 9. (2000). and Denhardt. Communication Education. Flamholtz. “Changing the game: Organizational transformations of the first. T. Y. and Greenberg.A. B. K. pp. N. job satisfaction. D. and Ryan.. pp. (2000). Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. E. Erdem. J.A. J.191-205.495-524. S. Dığın. E. Mckinnon. Croucher. (2002). pp. R. pp. 26(3). Department of Public Administration and Policy. Grunberger. Human Resource Management Review..63-79. reduced quality care”. 7. S. 11(4).227-268. Journal of Construction Research. H. New York.W. . The new public service: Serving. “The impact of human resource management practices on intention to leave of employees in the service industry in India: The mediating role of organizational commitment”. J. Griffeth.. Denhardt. Freeman. pp.20-31. San Diego State University. “The causal order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in models of employee turnover”. R.. (1978). pp. R. (2006). 58(1).W. (2011). Dergisi. Oommen. and Ünsar. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. A. Conger.(2000). “Surviving Layoffs: The effects of organizational commitment and job performance”. “Örgüt kültürü tipleri ile örgütsel bağlılık arasındaki ilişki: elazığ il merkezindeki hastaneler üzerinde bir çalışma”. second. pp. B.İ. “The power of momentum: A new model of dynamic relationships between job satisfaction change and turnover intentions”. NY: M. S. (1998).141. (1999). 15(6). CIBER working paper. Cooper-Thomas. “Job satisfaction as an economic variable”.L.D. 747-759. (1995). L. Psychological Inquiry. (2007). Chow..Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. and Steele.S. Zhou. S.B. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Currivan. Anderson. University at Albany. (2002). D. Gillilan. R. pp. “Çalışanların iş güvencesi algısının belirleyicileri ve iş güvencesinden memnuniyetin organizasyonel bağlılık.2-18. R. not steering. E. “Factors predicting organizational identification with intercollegiate forensics teams”.. pp.M.. and Aysıt. R. pp. V.L and Wu..W. 6. (2001). and third kinds”. 2(1). E. 26.74-91. Journal of Healthcare Management. Work and Occupations. D.. (2008). 463-88. pp.J. “Job satisfaction in Britain: Individual and related factors”. (2010).. (1997). E.L.159-181. pp. D. Gifford. (2010). C. and Picken.J.. (2000). “Exploring turnover intention of construction managers in China”. and Cho. M. P. J. 13-26. pp.
D.4-131. “Relations between organizational culture. “Evolving dimensions of performance from the CSRA to the present”.192-207. K.Schultz (1997). Human Resources Management Review. (1995). L. The social psychology of organizations. pp. A. and Aryee. M. 23. Lacey. Inc.S. and Aykanat. L. 6. 82 . 34 (1). “Integrating work environment perceptions: Explorations into the measurement of meaning”. pp. The TQM Magazine. 4(19). “An analysis of the factors affecting the turnover intention of non managerial clerical staff: a Singapore study”. L.R and Heskett. Katz. Hogan. (2006). P. “The motivational basis of organizational behavior”. 26(4). Lambert.. pp. L.96-118. G. “Karizmatik liderlik ve örgüt kültürü ilişkisi üzerine bir araştırma”. New Jersey : Pearson Education Inch. 11th Ed.. “İşyeri zorbalığı ve örgüt kültürü ilişkisi üzerine sosyolojik bir araştırma”. Brunsen. Schaubroeck. and M. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. Behavioral Science.A. Lambert. L. (1989). Hatch. 15. R. M. P. Management Science. C. and Goh. (1966). Humphreys. Ingraham. A. pp.. (1998). “An event history analysis of employee turnover: The case of hospital employees in Australia”. Journal of Applied Psychology. 31.739-751.L. Research in Sociology of Health Care. P. M. M.C. pp. J. J. E. Journal of Health Organization and Management. 9 (4). P. Katz. identity and image”. pp. (2004).118. The future of merit: Twenty years after the Civil Service Reform Act (pp. pp. “Quality practices that pay: Empowerment and teamwork”. pp.. and Change. (1994). L. E. and Barton. N. pp. H. H.. B. D. T. James. Pfiffner and D.131146. pp. New York: Free Press. Baltimore. “Relationship Between Overall Fairness and Employee Work Outcomes: A Cross-national Study”. 120-129. (2007).233-251. (1992). Malaysian Management Review. Kuşçu. 4th Ed.Stout. 74. European Journal of Marketing.397-418. MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. K.17-36 Hammerberg.T. December Gül. 38 (2). Kacmar. pp. Harris. R. pp. “An examination of the curvilinear relationship between leader-member exchange and intent to turnover”. (2005). (2005).Ç.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012.1-18. (2000). 187-201. 35(2). R. G. (2012). M. G. (1999). Reasons Given for Employee Turnover in a Full Priced Department Store. pp.66-76 Karia. Arıkan Press. N and Ahmad. and Witt. 18(1).).. S. and Beck-Warden. “Management scientists are human”. “The importance of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in shaping turnover intent: A test of a causal model”. (2001). University of Wisconsin. Z. pp 30–43. Brook (Eds. New York. and Moynihan. R. “Health care restructuring: bitter medicine or a shot in the arm for nursing?”. pp. Z. Karia. Iverson.M. Koh. Criminal Justice Review. International Journal of Human Resources Managament. S. 103-126). and James. J. Lam. (2009).A (2000). “The impact of job satisfaction on turnover intent: a test of a structural measurement model using a national sample of workers”.356-365. Hofstede. and Asaari. J. 19(2).. 9. Research Paper. and Kahn. Kotter. 16(1).363-378. “Corporate culture and performance”. Organizational Theory. Istanbul. D.J. and Hogan. Social Science Journal. Design. J. John Wiley & Sons. D. H. J. In J. W.D... Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi.. Journal of Organizational Behavior. (1964). H. and Davis. pp. Koçel. N. “The effects of total quality management practices on employees’ work-related attitudes”. (2002). Jones. İşletme Yöneticiliği. (2002). K. Journal of Organizational Behavior. S. “Emotional structure and commitment: implications for health care management”. (2011). N.
Journal of Applied Psychology. Employee turnover. A. “Some basic issues related to contextual performance and organizational citizenship behavior in human resource management”. pp. Philippines:Addison-Wesley Publishing. C. L and Topolaytsky. (2002). (2005). and Allen. pp. E. (1982). D.J. “Justice for all? Progress in research on cultural variation in the psychology of distributive and procedural justice”. Stanley.305–321.874-888.. and extra. J. correlates and consequences”. pp. R. European Business Review. 108(2). Y. pp. Academy of Management Journal. H.. S. 1(1). L. (2001). (2005). 83 . Meyer. Mobley. H. Employee Turnover: Causes.M. 34. While.115-126. Journal of Vocational Behavior. and Application”. LePine. K. A. (2006). D. J. S. Mathieu. Psychological Bulletin. Business Intelligence Journal. “A three component conceptualization of organizational commitment”.H. (2001).. 48(5). (1994). Consequences. Morris. (1977). “The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis”. and Control. 37(6). pp.. pp.E. 62(2). 18.. “Commitment in the Workplace: Theory. 3(1). (2002). Motowidlo. and Gavin. (1997). and Johnson. 61. Mayer. “A path model examining the relations among strategic performance measurement system characteristics. Applied Psychology: An International Review. M. Meyer. 49(1). “The relationship between spiritual management and determinants of turnover intention. J. 171-194.C and Idris. The TQM Magazine. “Affective. (2009). (2009).52-65. Chen. S. and Fakir. “Intermediate linkages in the relationship between job satisfaction and employee turnover”. Human Resource Management Review. (1982). Wang. pp. Lawson. (1998).. 42(2). K. H. (2009). J. Perceived employment discrimination and its relation to job satisfaction and intention to turnover. causes. CA. A.. A. consequences. A. N.J. 173-187. 22(1). Accounting.J. R. B.H. J. L. Burney. International Journal of Nursing Studies. W. pp.123-137. pp 61-98. Morrow. Journal of Applied Psychology. pp 51-60. “A nursing shortage: building organizational commitment among nurses”. and Zajac. Unpublished Master Thesis. Herscovitch. Menişa. Level of job satisfaction and intent to leave among Malaysian nurses.P. 87(1).100-132. and control. (1991). Morrison. Journal of Healthcare Management. R.L. Research.P and Allen. Thousand Oaks. W. pp. “A review and meta -analysis of the antecedents. correlates and consequences of organizational commitment”.K. W. Lee. J. pp.102-116. 10 (1). and Widener. D. (2000). December Lau. (1997).B and Shen. and Barriball. M. McNeese-Smith. T. M. M. NY: Oxford University Press. Henle. Laurie.. S. Human Resource Management Review. Organizations and Society. “Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss?”. E. H.1543-1567.P. A.C. and Dadura. pp. Journal of Organizational Behaviors. 211-227. “Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The importance of the employees' perspective”. Academy of Management Journal.M. “Research and concepts: The soft foundation of the critical success factors on TQM implementation in Malaysia”. “Job satisfaction among nurses: a literature review”. Lu. (1990). Masroor.E.363-396. A. J. N. and Leung. New York. 46(3). Istanbul: Marmara University. D. (2000). P. B. Mobley. W. Christine.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. 13(1).A. continuance and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents.237-240.. Meyer. Addison-Wesley Publishing. Z. Mobley. Ö. Sage. organizational justice. pp. pp.and in-role performance”. “The measurement of TQM principles and work -related outcomes”. pp 20-52. Organizational psychology: Foundation and applications. Erez.
(1988). R and Jolly.751-760. “The mea surement of organizational citizenship behavior: Are we assuming too much?”. pp. K. Pitts. Organ. C. “Assessing the impact of job involvement on performance”. “A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance”.203-215. DC: Georgetown University Press. D. MA: Lexington Books. and Fernandez. C. and Morrow. Ooi. 48. “A reappraisal and reinterpretation of the satisfaction causes performance hypothesis”.421-439. 79(4). W. “Impact of total quality attitude management and training and work content on attitude supervisor”. pp. pp. (2011). M and Hassan. and Pandey.J. W. Borman. and democratic values.C.153-170. S. 5(3).475-480. M. pp. D. Organ. 2(1). Ricardo. M. pp 54-59. Challenging the performance movement: Accountability. Journal of Vocational Behavior. Ongori. M. T and Myers. Motowidlo. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. (1995). (1980). Moynihan.. International Journal of Organization Analysis. W. pp.46-53. S. J. 35(2). (1997). “Perceived organizationa l support. Radin. federal employees”. Organizational Culture and Leadership. Muchinsky. and Meydan. S. pp. F. Myers. B. 84 . 46. Sunway Academic Journal. Human Performance. “Testing how management matters in an era of government by performance management”. pp. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. (1994). P. (2000). H. “Organizational experiences and propensity to leave: A multivariate ınvestigation of men and women managers”. “A multidisciplinary model of voluntary emp loyee turnover”. “So hard to say goodbye? Turnover intention among U. Human Performance. June. A. (2006).A. pp.4-21.B and Arumugam. Nacoste.H. Polat.. complexity.. pp. pp 99-115. M. (1999). 10(2). P.M Advanced Management Journal. Journal of Applied Psychology.. Rotenberry. (2007). “Örgüt kültürü bağlamında güç eğilimi ve örgütsel bağlılık ilişkisinde örgütsel özdeşleşmenin aracılık rolü”. V. and Rodriguez. H. E. J.263-290. and Moberg. (1997). O’Driscoll. S. Marvel. December Motowidlo.M. 10(2). P. E. W. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.197-211. R. satisfaction with rewards and employee job involvement and organizational commitment”. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi. Lexington.. K. 75(3). H. Public Administration Review. Journal of Vocational Behavior. Jossey-Bass. P. (1977).1527-1544. “Training of teams in the workplace”. R. (1992). Applied Psychology: An International Review. “The influence of corporate culture on organizational commitment: Case study of semiconductor organizations in Malaysia”. San Francisco.49-54. (2011).. Management Research News. 3. 25(1). 71. (2006).1– 16. A. J. C. “Organizational culture and work outcomes: Evidence from some Malaysian organisations”. J. African Journal of Business Management.P and Randall. D. pp. and Van Scotter. D. P. Organ. pp. 27.71-83. and Korabik. W. Rosin. “Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance”. and Schmit. “Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean -up time”. Mohr. Schein. (1997). J. W. 62(2). McGraw Hill Book Company. New York. D. pp.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. J.F. (1997). Malaysian Management Review. D. (1982). 17. M. pp. K. “A review of the literature on employee turnover”. Osland. Pond. S.M. (2005). pp 1-9.85-97. 30(3). Academy of Management Review. Managing by communication: An organizational approach . S. (1997).. pp.S. B. (2007). Saeed. Washington. M. D.
A. Scott. M. London. A. L. Istanbul: Marmara University. (2005). Affective Commitment and Intention to Turnover. Silverthorne. pp. self-efficacy and individual performance behaviors. 86. pp. Academy of Management Journal. (2000). “Abusive supervision. 109. and Kraimer. J. Academy of Management Journal. “Lider -üye etkileşimi ile işten ayrılma niyeti arasındaki ilişki üzerinde cinsiyetin etkisi”.. “Yabancılaşmanın işten ayrılma eğilimine etkisini belirlemeye yönelik bir alan araştırması”.625-638. (1998).. Irwin Business Publishing. and Dienesch. Schnake. D. D. pp. measurement.277-288. and LePine. A. Graham. S. Shalley.. “Predictors of propensity to turnover in the construction industry”. and Karahan. Borna S. P.. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.281-298. The mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relationship between participative organizational climate. J. Gravella. Trompenaars. and Drach-Zahavy. Sparrowe.. B. and Dumler. pp. W. and Hu. 25(7).765-802. Istanbul: Marmara University. and employees’ workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis” . J. C. “Job satisfaction and quitting intentions: A structural model of British general practitioners”.Directed Learning on Job Satisfaction. M. “Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition. (1994). 41. “Extra-role behaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (A bridge over muddied waters)”. T. M. 592-599. and Sibbald. Greenwich. M. Unpublished Master Thesis. Tepper.. R. and validation”. Van Dyne. 251-260. (2011). M. “An investigation of the effects o f corporate ethical values on employee commitment and performance: Examining the moderating role of perceived fairness”. Psychological Reports. “Culture: The Missing Concept in Organization Studies”. Ünsar. S.. Cummings. J. Shore. (2004). L. F. B. 37(4)... J. 44(2).M. pp. “Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity”. Institute of Social Sciences. L. 42(7).361-378. (2004). L.. “Social Networks and the performance of individuals and groups”. pp 1000-1002. J. Liden. 215-285). L. J. 44(3). 89. H. Van Dyne.215-223. Academy of Management Journal. 77. L. The Effects of Learning Organization Climate and Self. Simoens. 41(1).. pp. British Journal of Industrial Relations. and Blum. Şahin. Ege Akademik Bakış. M. Breaux. pp. (2009). “Exploring organizational citizenship behavior from an organizational perspective: The relationship between organizational learning and organizational citizenship behavior”. C. pp. Sharma. Hu. D. C. CT: JAI Press. A.. 11(2). R. Chris. (2006). pp. (1996).. R. 43(2). C. (1995). M. pp. (2001). Academy of Management Journal. Wayne. “Matching creativity requirements and the work environment: Effects on satisfaction and intentions to leave”. Riding the Waves of Culture. Unpublished Doctorate Thesis. 85 . intentions to quit.519-540. T. H. F. pp.). B. W.. Somech. pp. Staw (Eds. Carr. H. E. L. Gilson. Human Relations.156-167. (2010).. (2009). L. Journal of Business Ethics. U. “The impact of organizational culture and person -organization fit on organizational commitment and job satisfaction in Taiwan”.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012. and Martin. (l994). S. Tanrıöver. S. pp. and McLean-Parks. and Stearns. Research in organizational behavior (17. “Job satisfaction and organizational commitment in relation to work performance and turnover intentions”. S. J. L. C . Van Dyne. In L. SÜ İİBF Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology . (2000).316-325. Taştan. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal. Department of Organizational Behavior. Cummings and B.108-119. Administrative Science Quarterly. (1989). Geider. 229-240. (2011). December Schein.
. leadership empowerment behaviour. Yap. J. prevalence.K. Du Toit. “Exploring the effects of different reward programs on in-role and extra-role performance of retail sales associates”. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology. (1997). L. S.1-7.M. Shore. İ...235-249..1-6. “Perceived organizational support and leader -member exchange: a social exchange perspective”.. “Generational preferences for work environment fit: effects on employee outcomes”. R. University of Iowa. Williams. Werner. Z. Bove. pp. pp. M.. (2009). M. S. 8(30). and Rothmann. A.L. pp. (2009). and Ghani. (2010). pp.98-107. Academy of Management Journal.16-26. Bloomington. H. Zain. R. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. J. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal. and Yamamura J. 86 . (1988). H. E. 31(4). “The Influence of Corporate Culture on Organisational Commitment: A Study on a Malaysian Listed Company”. 79(1). W. (2005). employee engagement and intention to leave in petrochemical laboratory”. (2007). Zimmerman. (2006). D. 12(3). L.. Ishak.Journal of Global Strategic Management | 12| 2012.88-102. “Konaklama işletmelerinde işgörenlerin örgütsel güven duyguları ile iş tatmini ve işten ayrılma niyetleri üzerine bir alan araştırması”. L. H. (1994). pp. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.J. 8(1). European Journal of Economics. “Job insecurity. D. and Liden. Finance and Administrative Sciences. S. R. pp. Witte. and Beverland. Westerman J. “Job insecurity: Review of the international literature on definitions. Bothma. S. IN: Indiana University.E. Unpublished Doctorate Thesis. 40(1). pp. Understanding the impact of personality traits on individual’s turnover decisions. December Van Schalkwky. Career Development International. “Dimensions that make a difference: Examining the impact of inrole and extrarole behaviors on supervisory ratings”. Wayne. SA Journal of Human Resource Management. Journal of Applied Psychology.279-294. pp. (2009). 12(2). antecedents and consequences”.B. Yazıcıoğlu. Affective and nonaffective components of job satisfaction and organizational commitment as determinants of organizational citizenship and inrole behaviors.150-161. 17.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.