See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338550915

Testing the effects of job satisfaction on organizational commitment

Article  in  Journal of Management Development · December 2019

DOI: 10.1108/JMD-07-2018-0210

CITATIONS READS

0 309

2 authors:

Barooj Bashir Abdul Gani Ganai

Central University of Kashmir Central University of Kashmir
5 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION    8 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Quality of Work life View project

Moderating role of demographic variables in the relationship between Spirituality and Leadership Effectiveness: An exploratory formulative study. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abdul Gani Ganai on 01 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

Testing the
Testing the effects of effects of JS
job satisfaction on on OC

organizational commitment
Barooj Bashir and Abdul Gani
Department of Management Studies,
Received 30 July 2018
Central University of Kashmir, Srinagar, India Revised 5 March 2019
7 June 2019
Accepted 28 July 2019
Abstract
Purpose – As universities are human capital intensive organizations, practices followed by a university for
enhancing the satisfaction of its teachers can be of great help in attracting, retaining and managing highly
qualified and competent teachers. The purpose of this paper is to empirically examine the impact of job
satisfaction ( JS) on organizational commitment (OC) of university teachers in India.
Design/methodology/approach – A total of 396 academicians are surveyed to assess the subjects’
responses to JS and commitment questionnaire. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used in the process
of statistical analysis.
Findings – The results confirmed a significant impact of JS on OC of university teachers in India. With
1 percent increase in estimates of pay and job security (PJS), organizational support (OS) and job challenge
( JC), there would be 21, 36 and 49 percentage increase, respectively, in OC of university teachers. Of all the
factors of JS, JC is the most significant contributing factor, followed by OC and PJS that help in motivating
and retaining the teachers in higher education institutions in India.
Research limitations/implications – The sample of the study has been chosen from the higher education
sector in Northern India, and so it still needs to be explored whether the findings of this study can be replicated
in different geographical areas and organizational settings for further verification and generalization.
Practical implications – Encouraging greater satisfaction among the faculty members may positively
influence work-related behaviors, especially commitment among the teachers. The paper may benefit the
decision makers in universities to follow the proactive practices to improve the satisfaction and commitment
of teachers as educational performance is of priority on the national agenda.
Originality/value – The study provides useful insights about a JS-OC relationship model and informs the
stakeholders on how to create an enabling environment at the policy and practice level that would help in
attracting and retaining teachers in universities in India. It contributes to enriching the JS and OC literature in
a sector and a country poorly addressed so far in research.
Keywords India, Organizational commitment, Higher education, Job satisfaction, University teachers
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Job satisfaction ( JS) and commitment are the most lasting yet obscure constructs adopted in
the study of industrial relations (Locke, 1976; Soumyaja et al., 2011). These have been an area
of interest for many researchers over the past several decades which stems from its
relationship with an employee’s effectiveness and long-term success (Naumann, 1993). In the
current scenario, enhancing satisfaction of employees seems to be the new strategy of
organizations as they recognize that the “happier” their employees are, the better will be their
attitude toward the work and higher will be their motivation, performance and commitment
(Fogaça and Junior, 2016). This is the reason, the concept of JS has gained momentum and has
become a social issue around the world. The researchers have espoused to explore worldwide
the inputs that are effective in framing strategies which will enhance the satisfaction and
ultimately commitment among the employees.
For an educational system to be successful, the role of teachers is significant. Therefore,
educational institutions must ensure a healthy work environment for their teachers, so that Journal of Management
Development
they get fully involved in their jobs, which in turn will enhance their efficiency, increase their © Emerald Publishing Limited
0262-1711
JS and in the long run lead to the increased productivity of the educational institutions. DOI 10.1108/JMD-07-2018-0210
JMD Indian higher education system has registered an increase of 38.74 percent in the number of
universities and 19.13 percent increase in colleges as compared to 573 Universities and
35,539 Colleges in 2012, with over 15 lakh teachers and 294.27 lakh students on rolls in
2016–2017 (UGC Annual Report, 2016/2017). In spite of the phenomenal growth in the
higher education sector in India, teachers working in the sector are still beset with many
problems regarding the quality of their work life such as inconsistent promotion policy,
spontaneous transfers, insufficient salaries, lack of administrative support, lack of
resources, time pressures due to administrative burden, workload and insufficient
performance feedback (Evers et al., 2005), absence of a strong mechanism for grievance
redressal, improper working conditions and lack of majority of teachers’ participation in
university decision making. Consequently, this phenomenon has triggered concerns
of various parties to assiduously conduct research to gain a better understanding of the
issues related.
Research into academicians’ JS and its linkage with organizational commitment, has
been done mostly in western societies. Relatively little is known about the same in
non-western societies including India. Whatever little research is available on the subject in
India is limited and confined to banking, IT, automobiles, and manufacturing sectors only.
Moreover, the existing studies do not differentiate teachers from employees working in
other industries, therefore, this paper specifically focuses on the satisfaction and
commitment levels of university teachers in India. As the research on this subject in the
higher education sector is scanty due to the unique features of colleges and universities.
Most of the existing studies done in Indian context are also descriptive and devoid of
any empirical basis. Thus, the present research aims at filling up these gaps in the
existing research.
Moreover, the present research aspires to scrutinize how JS embellishes organizational
commitment (OC). Analyzing the impact of JS on OC at the university level is important for
both scholarly and practical reasons. The scholarly contribution of the study would
highlight how the dominant constructs of satisfaction play an important role in shaping
attitudes toward work, life and relationships of teachers in universities. On the pragmatic
level, this study would benefit the university administrators in framing the policies that
contribute to the satisfaction of its employees so that they are inclined to stay and maintain
a long-term relationship with their universities.

Literature review and hypotheses development

Job satisfaction
JS occupies a central role in many theories and models of individual attitudes and behaviors
(Locke, 1976). A formal study on JS did not turn up until the 1930s, though the study of
workers’ attitude began much earlier. Maslow’s needs hierarchy theory was one of the first
theories to examine the important contributors to JS (Newstrom and Davis, 2002).
Complementary theories advocated by Elton Mayo held that apart from earning money,
workers could be motivated better by having their social needs met while at work. The
theories of Hoppock (1935) and Herzberg (1957) served as a conceptual framework for many
JS surveys. Reviews during the 1970s set the stage for more radical advances and
consolidated thinking around existing streams of research (Locke, 1976). Spector (1997) has
advanced the description of JS to constitute different facets of the job such as development,
job enhancement, enrichment and teamwork, appreciation, communication, co-workers,
fringe benefits, job conditions and security that measures how an individual perceives his/
her job. It has been observed that contentment with one’s work differs across individuals,
and how individuals view their work orientation depends not only on how much satisfied
they are with the variety of aspects of their work but also on their values and beliefs
(Lan et al., 2013).
 Employee JS is perhaps the most important aspect that critically influences the success Testing the
of an organization. Job satisfaction is directly linked to an individual’s happiness, as there is effects of JS
a positive relationship between job and life satisfaction (Kornhauser, 1965). JS is an on OC
important determinant of employee job performance (Podsakoff et al., 2000), OC (Ashford
et al., 1989), career mentoring (Baranik et al., 2010; Weng et al., 2010), attendance at work
(Scott and Taylor, 1985), pro-social and organizational citizenship behaviors (Farrell and
Rusbult, 1983) and emotional intelligence (Sony and Mekoth, 2016; Trivellas et al., 2013).
On the same parlance, when teachers’ needs are satisfied, their psychological well-being is
promoted which enables their best possible functioning and performance ( Judge et al., 2001).
On the contrary, when teachers do not get the expected experiences, they fail to thrive
(Usop et al., 2013). The researchers also recognized the financial resources, faculty workload,
and technology impact as the challenges to JS of the teachers (Miller et al., 2000).

Organizational commitment
The concept of OC has also attracted substantial attention over recent years as it is an
intriguing trait of employee behavior (Rehman et al., 2012; Soumyaja et al., 2011). OC is the
degree to which an individual accepts, internalizes, and views his/her responsibility based
on organizational ideals and goals ( Johns, 2005). Although numerous differences in the
approach to commitment research exist, a central theme that continues to appear is the
individual’s psychological attachment to an organization (O’Reilly and Chatman, 1986).
The fallacies and drawbacks resulting from improper execution of single-dimension
approach formed the basis for leading multidimensional approaches during 1980s. The
calculative and the moral or attitudinal views of commitment have dominated the research
on the subject (McGee and Ford, 1987; Meyer and Allen, 1984).
The three-dimensional theory propounded by Allen and Meyer (1990) has been the foremost
approach to OC for more than two decades. The model corresponds with different
psychological states encompassing affective commitment, continuance commitment and
normative commitment. Affective commitment is “the employee’s emotional attachment to,
recognition with, and involvement in the organization” (Allen and Meyer, 1990). Experimental
research has shown that, compared to other dimensions of commitment, affective commitment
predicts better the employee performance (Gill et al., 2011), turnover (Herscovitch and Meyer,
2002; Lapointe et al., 2013), work-engagement (Poon, 2013) and organizational citizenship
(Kazemipour et al., 2012; Kim, 2014). Continuance commitment is calculative in nature as it
reflects calculation of the costs of leaving vs the desire of an individual to continue membership
with the organization based on estimation of profitable benefits gained (Allen and Meyer, 1990;
Rego and Pina, 2008). It is stronger when fewer alternatives are available and the number of
accrued investments is high, which means that if an employee gets better alternative than the
present one, he/she may leave the organization (Best, 1994). In normative commitment
individuals tend to believe that they ought to stay with the organization regardless of what it
offers them (Meyer and Allen, 1997). A sense of duty, responsibility and an obligation toward
an organization based on internalized moral beliefs makes an individual to be obliged to
sustain membership in the organization (Balassiano and Salles, 2012).

Job satisfaction and organizational commitment relationship

JS is a specific job-related issue, whereas commitment is a more comprehensive response to
an organization. Therefore, commitment is more constant than JS and takes longer after one
is contented with his/her job (Feinstein and Vondrasek, 2006). JS and OC are the important
notions that determine the attitudes of employees at workplace. If the employees’ attitude
toward their organization is positive, it will reap optimistic outcomes in the form of
performance and organizational productivity (Shah et al., 2014), while the absence of JS leads
to sluggishness and reduced OC (Eslami, and Gharakhani, 2012; Moser, 1997).
JMD Research studies have used different variables as mediators and moderators to check the
relationship between JS and OC like job involvement (Ćulibrk et al., 2018) and ethical climate
(Zehir et al., 2012) respectively, but till now no consistent results have been found. Several
studies have focused on linking JS, job characteristics, organizational climate and perceived
organizational support (OS) to OC (Biswas and Bhatnagar, 2013; Munirah et al., 2012; Wang
et al., 2011; Zeinabadia, 2010). Likewise, the work attitudes of JS and OC have been found to be
important in shaping employees’ intentions to stay or leave (Mowday et al., 1982). The extrinsic
factors (pay, promotion or working conditions) are more powerful than intrinsic factors
(job variety and experience) in generating a feeling of commitment among the employees
(Durukan et al., 2017). Various studies have shown that the negative consequences of OC and
JS include absenteeism, tardiness and turnover (Pfeffer, 2007; Salleh et al., 2012; Yücel, 2012;
Zopiatis et al., 2014). Therefore, the managers should make an appropriate investment in JS so
that employees would achieve a higher level of OC (Eslami and Gharakhani, 2012).
In an academic context, understanding the behaviors and attitudes of a teacher requires
more attention as the overall performance of universities depends upon their teachers, which
ought to be commitment and satisfaction (Tsui and Cheng, 1999). Grace and Khalsa (2003)
identified professional development and salary packages as the most important JS factors that
leads to commitment, while, on the other hand, Miller and Lee (2001) and Vander and Wimsatt
(1999) explained university support, level of job sprain, income, cooperative climate, locus of
control, employment options and supervision as the factors that are valuable in consideration
of JS in faculty positions at an institution. The positive and productive university environment
deduces into academic employee’s better JS (Anari, 2012), boosts their organizational
commitment and enhances the output of the universities (Sabri et al., 2011).
While some research studies support the argument that JS predicts OC (Meyer et al.,
2002; Valaei and Rezaei, 2016; Yücel, 2012), others suggest that the OC is an antecedent to JS
(Bateman and Strasser, 1984; Curry et al., 1986; Vandenberg and Lance, 1992). On the other
hand, Currivan (1999) and Jenkins and Thomlinson (1992) revealed no significant
association between the two variables. Irving et al. (1997) proclaimed JS to be positively
related with affective and normative commitment, but not with continuance commitment.
As such, till date, no consistent results have been found on the relationship between the two
variables and need further exploration. Therefore, the following hypothesis is affirmed:
H1. JS positively affects OC.
Of all the factors, PJS are the most important ones influencing one’s level of JS as these
provide a potential source of self-esteem and are the main indicators of employee status
(Brockner, 1988). These motivational factors attract the quality work-force, retain talented
employees, motivate and maintain the satisfaction of existing employees, and boost
competition among the employees to work hard and to achieve organizational and
individual goals (Dulebohn and Werling, 2007; Jacques and Roussel, 1999). Though,
satisfaction with the pay makes an individual feel valued which in turn results in their
stronger affective commitment (Vandenberghe and Tremblay, 2008), but money is not the
motivating factor; rather a hygiene factor that may or may not necessarily lead to
satisfaction (Herzberg, 1957). Yet, pay remains the fundamental way by which the
organizations reward their employees. Job security is an important determinant of employee
health (Kuhnert et al., 1989); JS and OC (Ashford et al., 1989) and employee turnover (Arnold
and Feldman, 1982). Hence, the following hypothesis needs to be stated:
H1a. PJS positively affects OC.
The social context of work is likely to have a significant impact on a worker’s attitudinal
and behavior relationships, with both co-workers and supervisors being important
(Gaire and KC, 2016). The employees that have a better relationship with their co-workers
are also more likely to be satisfied with their jobs (Mao, 2006; Tran et al., 2018). Treatment of Testing the
fairness, supervisory support and cooperative peers within an organization are associated effects of JS
with perceived OS, which has a positive impact on employee performance (Rhoades and on OC
Eisenberger, 2002) and leads to the outcomes favorable to employees (i.e., JS, positive mood)
and the organization (e.g. affective commitment, high performance and reduced intention to
leave). Thus, the following hypothesis may be affirmed:
H1b. OS positively affects OC.
JC is one of the key facets that assess how perceptions about the future can affect JS and
commitment of employees (Hackman and Oldham, 1980; Loscocco, 1990). As a predictor of
job-dissatisfaction, nothing surpasses the nature of the task itself. Opportunities to use skills
and abilities, offering variety of tasks, freedom, and feedback makes the jobs challenging
due to which employees experience pleasure, motivation, satisfaction and exhibit
commitment (Grant et al., 2011). The boredom generated by simple and repetitive jobs,
that do not mentally challenge the employee, leads to frustration and dissatisfaction
(Bruursema et al., 2011; Reijseger et al., 2013) and has a strong negative effect on employees’
commitment (Spector et al., 2006). Hence, the following hypothesis has been developed:
H1c. JC positively affects OC.
Based on the above review of literature, the following conceptual framework (Figure 1) has
been developed to explore the relationships between JS and OC.

Methodology
The study is based on full time and permanent university teachers selected from public and
private universities in Northern India. While visiting the universities, the respondents were
asked to complete the questionnaires which were later collected personally, which ensured
a high return rate and encouraged freedom of expression from the respondents. Simple
random sampling was used to choose the samples from each university as the sampling
frame was readily available. The sample size was determined considering different
methods available in the sampling literature including sample size determination tables
(Krejcie and Morgan, 1970), the item to response ratio estimates and the ten-times rule
method (Hair et al., 2011). Even though data were collected personally, taking a safer
perspective, a sample size of 430 was targeted. The incomplete questionnaires, outliers and
unengaged responses were excluded from the final sample and the effective sample size
available was 396 with an aggregate response rate of about 92.09 percent.

PJS

H
OS JS OC

JC

Note: PJS, Pay and Job-Security; OS, Organizational Support;

JC, Job Challenge; JS, Job Satisfaction and OC, Organizational
Figure 1.
Commitment Conceptual framework
Source: Authors own
JMD Table I, representing sample profile of respondents, reveals that the majority of
the respondents under study were males (60 percent), young falling in the age group of
31–40 years (43 percent), highly qualified possessing the degrees of Ph D (90 percent)
but most at the level of Assistant Professors (67 percent) and earning monthly
Rs50,000–Rs75,000 (66 percent).
The items used in JS scale were framed by taking into consideration the items/factors
originally developed by Hackman and Oldham (1980) and Hatfield et al. (1985). Necessary
changes were made to improve content validity. The items in JS scale were evenly
distributed across three components of PJS, OS and JC. The statements used for measuring
OC were adapted from questionnaires developed by (Allen and Meyer, 1990; Porter
and Smith, 1970), with necessary modifications to suit the present research context. Using
a five-point Likert scale respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement on each
statement from “1” as “strongly disagree” to “5” as “strongly agree.” Several author
researchers (BinBakr and Ahmes, 2015; Bohórquez, 2014; Juhdi and Hamid, 2009; Mowday
et al., 1979) have used these scales in university context for determining OC-JS in
their studies.
Cronbach’s α value for JS (α: 0.801) and OC (α: 967) indicate that the scales have internal
consistency; hence no changes are required. Composite reliability (CR) scores were also
calculated for reliability of the instrument, the results of which are mentioned in Table III.
In terms of CR, the scales exceed the recommended cut off value of 0.70 except for the
PJS (0.695). Thus it is reasonable to conclude that the scales are reliable. Convergent
validity was established through average variance explained (AVE). AVE of extracted
individual constructs was found to be more than 0.5. All individual constructs satisfied the
pre-requisite (i.e. the fit criterion) of convergent validity, except the PJS factor whose
AVE is 0.450.

Particulars No. of valid responses Percent (%)

Gender
Male 240 60.6
Female 156 39.4
Age
21–30 years 16 4.0
31–40 years 170 42.9
41–50 years 121 30.6
51 years and above 89 22.5
Education qualification
PG 12 3.0
MPhil 26 6.6
PhD 358 90.4
Designation
Professor 87 21.9
Associate Professor 43 10.9
Assistant Professor 266 67.2
Monthly Income
Less than Rs50,000 6 1.5
Rs50,000–75,000 262 66.2
Table I. Rs75,000– 1,00,000 32 8.1
Sampling profile Above Rs1,00,000 96 24.2
of respondents Source: Authors own
The normality of the data was checked by way of Skewness and Kurtosis measures Testing the
(Table II). All the two constructs used in the study were approximately normally distributed, effects of JS
with a skewness of −0.77 (SE ¼ 0.123) and a Kurtosis of –1.86 (SE ¼ 0.245) for JS and on OC
skewness of −0.002 (SE ¼ 0.123) and a Kurtosis of −2.35 (SE ¼ 0.245) for OC.
For the purpose of scale purification, the multivariate technique of factor analysis was
used with the help of SPSS 21. Principal component analysis along with varimax rotation
was used to simplify the columns in a factor matrix by looking at whether underlying
assumptions are met in Eigen values ( W1) and factor loadings are greater than
0.50. Dimension wise result of EFA is also shown in Table III.
Table IV shows that the square root of the average variance extracted are larger than the
correlation coefficients, thus establishing the discriminating validity of the scale.

Data analysis
The data analysis was done by first examining the measurement model and then using the
structural paths to test the hypotheses set for this study.

The measurement model

The latent research constructs used in the study include JS and OC, which were measured
by way of multiple observed variables in order to assess measurement errors. The theory
postulates that if JS is enhanced it would influence OC on the basis of their representative
manifest items. In our data set, we have four constructs and 18 indicators, each construct
having multiple indicator variables. JS was conceptualized as having three dimensions,
namely PJS (three indicators), OS ( four indicators) and JC ( four indicators) while OC
included seven indicators. All the constructs are freely correlated and error terms are
uncorrelated within measured variables. Figure 2 depicts the resulting measurement model.
In the above model, the value of χ2/df (1.562) and goodness-of-fit measures (CFI: 0.970,
GFI: 0.947 and AGFI: 0.928) suggested an excellent fit between the data and the model. On
other hand badness-of-fit measure indices are desirable; it includes RMSEA: 0.038,
RMR: 0.018. Other goodness-of-fit indices, i.e., incremental (NFI: 0.972, TLI: 0.988) as against
the recommended value of W0.90) are also satisfactory. Hence, the theorized model fits well
with the observed data.

Structural model and hypothesis testing

In the structural model (Figure 3), JS is treated as an independent or exogenous variable,
whereas OC is a dependent or an endogenous variable which examines the impact of JS on
OC. For the structural model, χ2/df is 1.550 (where χ2 ¼ 199.892 and df ¼ 129), suggesting
acceptable model fit. Goodness-of-fit measures (CFI: 0.976, GFI: 0.946 and AGFI: 0.929),
RMSEA (0.037) and root mean square residual (RMR ¼ 0.019) are in line with the threshold
values for the test statistics, thus indicating an excellent fit for the structural model.
Assessment of the impact of JS on OC, as depicted in Figure 3, revealed that JS
significantly influences the OC of university teachers in India (SRW ¼ 0.71, p o0.05). Thus
H1 that JS positively affects OC is accepted, lending credence to the argument that employee
JS acts as a catalyst in enhancing their OC as employees satisfied with their jobs are more
likely to be committed to their organizations.

Job satisfaction Organizational commitment

Table II.
Skewness −0.095/0.123 ¼ −0.77 −0.280/123 ¼ −0.002 Skewness and
Kurtosis −0.456/0.245 ¼ −1.86 −0.577/0.245 ¼ −2.35 kurtosis of the sample
JMD
Constructs/ Item (label) Code Rotated Eigen Variance CR AVE
dimensions/factors factor value extracted
(multi item measure) loading %
(Factor 1) job Satisfied with the personal growth 0.921 7.408 41.157 0.957 0.848
challenge and development ( JS2)
Satisfied with the feeling of 0.912
worthwhile accomplishment I get
from doing my job ( JS5)
Satisfied with the independent 0.902
thought and action I can exercise in
my job ( JS9)
Satisfied with the amount of 0.875
challenge in my job ( JS10)
(Factor 2) Satisfied with the people I talk to and 0.910 3.125 17.359 0.914 0.729
Organizational work with ( JS3)
support Satisfied with the degree of respect 0.783
and fair treatment ( JS4)
Satisfied with the support and 0.943
guidance I receive from my
supervisor ( JS6)
Satisfied with the chance to get to 0.902
know other people while on job ( JS8)
(Factor 3) pay and job Satisfied with the level of job security 0.755 2.232 12.398 0.695 0.450
security ( JS1)
Paid adequately for what I contribute 0.826
to this university ( JS7)
Convinced that my future is secure in 0.742
this university ( JS11)
(Factor 4) My values and the university values 0.901 1.718 9.546 0.966 0.804
organizational are same (OC1)
commitment This university really inspires the 0.879
very best in me by way of job
performance (OC2)
I really feel as if university problems 0.923
are my own (OC3)
For me this is the best of all 0.862
universities for which to work (OC4)
I would be happy to spend the rest of 0.886
my career with this university (OC5)
This university deserves my loyalty 0.919
(OC6)
Table III. I would feel guilty if I left (OC7) 0.852
Factor analysis, CR
and AVE of the Rotation sums of squared loadings (Cumulative % of variance) 80.45%
instrument Source: Authors own

Results of sub- structural model (Figure 4) further reveal that PJS (β ¼ 0.21, p o 0.001),
OS ( β ¼ 0.36, p o 0.001) and JC ( β ¼ 0.49, p o 0.001) are significantly related
to Organizational Commitment, thereby, leading to the acceptance of the
sub-hypotheses Ha–Hc. The results indicate that with 1 percent increase in estimates of
PJS, OS and JC, there would be 21, 36 and 49 percentage increase respectively in OC of
university teachers. Of all the factors of JS, JC is the most significant contributing factor,
followed by OS and PJS that help in motivating and retaining the teachers in higher
education institutions in India.
Discussion and conclusion Testing the
The overall performance of the higher educational institutions mostly depends upon their effects of JS
teachers which emanate from the degree of their OC and satisfaction from their jobs on OC
(Malik, 2010). The study revealed a significant relationship between JS and OC, which
indicates that by convalescing the satisfaction of academicians, it will lead to their increased
performance and commitment on the job. These findings are in line with those of the
previous studies conducted by Adekola (2012), Anari (2012), Colakoglu et al. (2010), Lambert
and Hogan (2009), Malhotra and Mukherjee (2004) and Yücel (2012). Reasons for this
significant relationship are attributed to the fact that commitment is interrelated to
satisfaction in a way that if the job dimensions meet the needs of the teachers, they will
never think of quitting from the job (Ramayah and Nasurdin, 2003), while the absence of it
may lead to reduction in their commitment or even switchover to another job. However, our
findings are contrary to those of Ferdus and Kabir (2018) and Testa (2001) which state that

AVE MSV JC PJS OS OC

JC 0.848 0.279 0.921

PJS 0.450 0.055 0.235 0.671
OS 0.729 0.016 0.128 0.104 0.854 Table IV.
OC 0.804 0.279 0.528 0.149 0.101 0.897 Discriminant validity
Source: Authors own of factors

e3 JS1 0.54
0.90
e2 JS7 0.61 PJS.
e1 JS11
e7 JS3 0.10
0.91
e6 JS4 0.67
0.96 0.23
e5 JS6 OS.
0.85
e4 JS8
0.13
e9 JS2 0.90 0.15
0.89
e8 JS5 0.97 JC.
e10 JS9 0.92 0.10
e11 JS10
e18 OC1 0.53
0.91
e17 OC2 0.87
e16 OC3 0.94
0.84 OC.
e15 OC4 0.89
0.96
e14 OC5 0.86
e13 OC6
e12 OC7 Figure 2.
Measurement Model
Source: Authors own
JMD e19

e3 JS1 0.54
0.89
e2 JS7 0.51 PJS.
OC7 e12
e1 JS11
e20 e22
0.67 0.86 OC6 e13
e7 JS3 0.96
0.91 OC5 e14
e6 JS4 0.67 0.89
0.96 0.71 0.94
e5 JS6 0.56 OC4 e15
0.85 OS TOTAL_JS. TOTAL_OC. 0.94
e21 0.87 OC3 e16
e4 JS8
0.87 0.91
e9 JS2 OC2 e17
0.90
Figure 3. 0.89 OC1 e18
e8 JS5
Impact of Job 0.97 JC.
e10 JS9 0.92
Satisfaction on
Organizational e11 JS10
Commitment
Source: Authors own

e19

e3 JS1 0.56
0.86
e2 JS7 0.53 PJS.
e1 JS11
0.21 OC7 e12
e20 e22
0.85 OC6 e13
e7 JS3 0.98
0.91
0.89 OC5 e14
e6 JS4 0.67
0.96 0.94
e5 JS6 0.36 OC4 e15
0.85 OS. TOTAL_OC. 0.94
e4 JS8 0.87
OC3 e16
0.91
OC2 e17
0.49
OC1 e18
Figure 4. e21
Impact of Sub e9 JS2 0.90
dimensions of Job e8 JS5 0.89
0.97 JC.
Satisfaction on e10 JS9 0.92

Organizational e11 JS10

Commitment
Source: Authors own

even though the employees are satisfied with their present jobs, their commitment is
moderate and do not wish to remain a member of the organization for lifetime. Ismail (2012)
also does not reveal any significant relationship between the two variables because many
employees, even though dissatisfied, may not like to quit their jobs as they are afraid of
losing the benefits (such as retirement benefit, compensation and fringe benefits) being
received from their present organization.
JC, autonomy, skill variety and role clarity are the positive aspects of the individuals’
work life and satisfy an academic’s need for engaging in meaningful work activities
(Hackman and Oldham, 1980) and ultimately lead to critical psychological state associated
with important outcomes such as JS, intrinsic motivation and work effectiveness and
commitment (Hackman and Lawler, 1971). Findings from the sub- structural model also
revealed a significant impact of JC on OC. These results are consistent with those of some of
the earlier studies (Kiggundu, 1990; Morgeson and Humphrey, 2006; Parker, 2006; Parker
et al., 2006). Human competencies can be developed by providing challenging work
assignments that enhance knowledge, skills and abilities, positive self-esteem, involvement,
autonomy and motivation, by providing proper training, skill variety, task significance,
recognition, job freedom and promotion. Therefore, the universities should promote
supportive work culture that gives the employees freedom to achieve well-being by availing Testing the
an opportunity to use the capabilities that he/she possesses and values which makes the effects of JS
work promising and fulfilling. on OC
Consistent with the results of previous studies (Abbassi, 2008; Bashir et al., 2011;
Golkar, 2013; Jandaghi et al., 2011; Kuria et al., 2012), the present study also revealed
a significant effect of PJS on OC of the university teachers presumably because
compensation is the most dominant variable that influences employee’s OC. Drobnič et al.
(2010) suggest that the key element that candidly affects employee’s quality of life is the
issue of security (employment and pay) which provides economic security. The other factors
such as autonomy at work, good career prospects and an interesting job have an indirect
impact on work life (Drobnič et al., 2010). Thus, the satisfied employees view their
workplaces positively and are motivated to work productively where conditions like
reasonable demands, high intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, influence over workplace
decisions and available resources to do the job exist (McGregor, 1960).
In the workplaces where supervisors are supportive, co-workers are helpful and
cooperative, the employees feel comfortable in their working atmosphere, which in turn
increases their sense of commitment (Eliyana and Ratmawati, 2013) and boosts their energy
for achievement (Anari, 2012). These findings corroborated some of the previous ones on the
subject (Dutton, 2003; Dutton and Ragins, 2007; Emhan, 2014; Yang et al., 2011). This is
attributed to the fact that better the relationship among fellow workers and between
workers and their immediate boss, greater will be the level of JS, as employees prefer to
work with people being friendly, supportive and cooperative (Zehir et al., 2011).
An individual’s level of JS is a function of his/her personal characteristics and those of the
groups to which h/she belongs.

Suggestions and implications

The present research is important for practitioners as it should further convince
them of the importance of providing all the necessary facilities in their organizations
that provide satisfaction to the employees. As the findings of the study provide
evidence that PJS, JC and OS motivate the employees better, management should
focus on these factors as a means to enhance JS and commitment among employees.
Our results also suggest that a favorable work culture is important which should
encourage university administrators to focus on creating a supportive professional
environment as it fosters a culture of interaction and trust (Messner, 2013; Wasti, 2003).
To build a contented work environment, the authorities need to engage the employees in
challenging work that enhances their effectiveness and commitment as well. Moreover, the
academicians should be provided with degree of autonomy at work, freedom to
carry out their job responsibilities in terms of choosing the course to teach, the topic
of research, planning their lessons, which fosters a sense of responsibility and a feeling of
commitment among them (Amarasena et al., 2015; Saragih, 2011). Deans of the universities
should be aware of the non-material effects of awards and should cultivate the tendency of
giving due recognition to the work of meritorious teachers as employees respond
to the appreciation expressed through recognition of their good work as it confirms their
work is being valued. Special attention should be provided to the young faculty members
so that they can fulfill their mid-career aspirations. Ensuring that teachers have
opportunities for advancement on their jobs, Faculty development programmes should be
made mandatory and universities should not merely provide assistance such as
scholarship and study leave but also encourage teachers to participate and utilize such
opportunities to acquire new skills that will improve their competencies on the job and
eventually their satisfaction.
JMD Limitations and future research agenda
Some caution is needed in interpreting the results of this study. A sample of 396 respondents
is not a sample large enough to generalize the findings of the study and to reach on definite
conclusions about the relationship between JS and OC a larger sample would be more
appropriate which may facilitate validating the present findings. The sample has been
chosen from universities in North India. Examining the relationship between JS and OC in
different contexts and in a wider variety of settings for enhancing the generalizability of the
results of this study would be a fruitful area for future research. Besides quantitative
analysis, future studies must be supplemented with qualitative analysis to get better
insights of the subject matter.
Furthermore, the current study has been undertaken with one dependent variable. Future
research could be done using two or more than two dependent variables like employee
performance, organizational citizenship behavior etc. There are number of other vitally
important variables and dimensions of JS, besides the ones taken in present study, which could
be chosen as independent variables for determining their impact on OC, such as role efficacy,
personality, job involvement, attitude, creativity, level of motivation, trust, decentralization. In
order to examine strengths and weaknesses in the total work environment and develop
appropriate strategies for JS of employees, further examination of employees’ perceptions of
satisfaction concepts, dimensions and categories across different settings is needed.

References
Abbassi, D. (2008), “To study affecting factors on Zanjan University faculties’ job commitment”,
doctoral dissertation, MA thesis, Zanjan University.
Adekola, B. (2012), “The impact of organizational commitment on job satisfaction: a study of employees
at Nigerian Universities”, International Journal of Human Resource Studies, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 1-17,
available at: http://doi.org/10.5296/ijhrs.v2i2.1740
Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1990), “The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and
normative commitment to the organization”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 63 No. 1,
pp. 1-18.
Amarasena, T.S.M., Ajward, A.R. and Ahasanul Haque, A.K.M. (2015), “The impact of work autonomy
on job satisfaction of academic staff: an empirical examination of government universities in
Sri Lanka”, International Journal of Recent Advances in Organizational Behaviour & Decision
Sciences, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 575-586.
Anari, N.N. (2012), “Teachers: emotional intelligence, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment”,
Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 256-269, available at: http://doi.org/10.1108/
13665621211223379
Arnold, H.J. and Feldman, D.C. (1982), “A multivariate analysis of the determinants of job turnover”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 350-360.
Ashford, S.J., Lee, C.L. and Bobko, P. (1989), “Content, causes, and consequences of job insecurity: a
theory-based measure and substantive test”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32,
pp. 803-829.
Balassiano, M. and Salles, D. (2012), “Perceptions of equity and justice and their implications on
affective organizational commitment: a confirmatory study in a teaching and research institute”,
BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 268-286.
Baranik, L., Roling, E.A. and Eby, L.T. (2010), “Why does mentoring work? The role of perceived
organizational support”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 366-373, available at:
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.07.004
Bashir, M., Jianqiao, L., Zhang, Y., Ghazanfar, F., Abrar, M. and Khan, M.M. (2011), “The relationship
between high performance work system, organizational commitment and demographic factors
in public sector universities of Pakistan”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business, Vol. 1
No. 8, pp. 62-71.
Bateman, T.S. and Strasser, S. (1984), “A longitudinal analysis of the antecedents of organizational Testing the
commitment”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 95-112, doi: 10.2307/255959. effects of JS
Best, P.W. (1994), “Locus of control, personal commitment and commitment to the organization”, on OC
Unpublished M. Com thesis. University of South Africa, Pretori.
BinBakr, M.B. and Ahmes, E.I. (2015), “An empirical investigation of faculty members’ organizational
commitment in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia”, An Empirical Investigation of Faculty Members’
Organizational Commitment in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Vol. 3 No. 8, pp. 1020-1026.
Biswas, S. and Bhatnagar, J. (2013), “Mediator analysis of employee engagement: role of perceived
organizational support, P-O fit, organizational commitment and job satisfaction”, Vikalpa,
Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 27-41.
Bohórquez, N. (2014), “Organizational commitment and leadership in higher education institutions1”,
Organizational Commitment And Leadership In Higher Education Institutions, pp. 7-21.
Brockner, J. (1988), Self Esteem at Work, D. C. Health and Company, Lexington, MA.
Bruursema, K., Kessler, S.R. and Spector, P.E. (2011), “Bored employees misbehaving: the relationship
between boredom and counterproductive work behavior”, Work & Stress, Vol. 25 No. 2,
pp. 93-107, doi: 10.1080/02678373.2011.596670.
Colakoglu, U., Culha, O. and Atay, H. (2010), “The effects of perceived organisational support on
employees’affective outcomes: evidence from the hotel industry”, Tourism Hospitality
Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 125-150.
Ćulibrk, J., Delić, M., Mitrović, S. and Ćulibrk, D. (2018), “Job satisfaction, organizational commitment
and job involvement: the mediating role of job involvement”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 9,
pp. 132.
Currivan, D.B. (1999), “The causal order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in models of
employee turnover”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 495-524.
Curry, J.P., Wakefield, D.S., Price, J.L. and Mueller, C.W. (1986), “On the causal ordering of job satisfaction
and organizational commitment”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29, pp. 847-858,
doi: 10.2307/255951.
Drobnič, S., Beham, B. and Präg, P. (2010), “Good job, good life? Working conditions and quality of life
in Europe”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 99 No. 2, pp. 205-225.
Dulebohn, J.H. and Werling, S.E. (2007), “Compensation research past, present, and future”, Human
Resource Management Review, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 191-207.
Durukan, K., Serap and Köse, T. (2017), “The effect of job satisfaction on organizational commitment of
healthcare personnel”, IOSR Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 19, pp. 54-59,
doi: 10.9790/487X-1901025459.
Dutton, J.E. (2003), Energize Your Workplace: How to Create and Sustain High-Quality Connections at
Work, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Dutton, J.E. and Ragins, B.R. (2007), Exploring Positive Relationships at Work, Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Eliyana, A. and Ratmawati, D. (2013), “Influence of transformational leadership and organization
climate to the work satisfaction, organizational commitment and organizational citizenship
behavior on the educational personnel‖”, European Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 5
No. 10, pp. 97-115.
Emhan, A. (2014), “Relationship among managerial support, job satisfaction and organisational
commitment: a comparative study of non-profit, for-profit and public sector in Turkey,
international journal of business”, Humanities and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 5, pp. 179-190.
Eslami, J. and Gharakhani, D. (2012), “Organizational commitment and job satisfaction”, Journal of
Science and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 85-91.
Evers, W., Tomic, W. and Brouwers, A. (2005), “Constructive thinking and burnout among secondary
school teachers”, Social Psychology of Education, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 425-439.
JMD Farrell, D. and Rusbult, C. (1983), “Exchange variables as predictors of job satisfaction, job
commitment, and turnover: the impact of rewards, costs, alternatives, and investments”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 78-95.
Feinstein, A.H. and Vondrasek, D. (2006), “A study of relationship between job satisfaction and
organizational commitment among restaurant employees”, available at: http://hotel.unlv.edu/
pdf/jobSatisfaction.pdf (accessed July 15, 2006).
Ferdus, Z. and Kabir, T. (2018), “Effect of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on OCB:
study on private banks in Bangladesh”, World Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 57-69.
Fogaça, N. and Junior, F.A.C. (2016), “Is ‘happy worker’ more productive”, Management, Vol. 4 No. 4,
pp. 149-160.
Gaire, A.K.S. and KC, F.B. (2016), “Co-workers’ impact on attitudinal behavior of the faculty members of
educational institutions of Nepal”, Journal of Advanced Academic Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Gill, H., Meyer, J.P., Lee, K., Shin, K.H. and Yoon, C.Y. (2011), “Affective and continuance commitment
and their relations with deviant workplace behaviors in Korea”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 595-607.
Golkar, N. (2013), “The relationship between QWL and Job satisfaction: a survey of human resource
managers in Iran”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Vol. 5 No. 8,
pp. 215-224.
Grace, D.H. and Khalsa, S.A. (2003), “Re-recruiting faculty and staff: the antidote to today’s high
attrition”, Independent School, Vol. 62 No. 3, pp. 20-27.
Grant, A.M., Fried, Y. and Juillerat, T. (2011), “Work matters: Job design in classic and contemporary
perspectives”, in Zedeck, S. (Ed.), APA Handbooks in Psychology. APA Handbook of Industrial
and Organizational Psychology. Building and Developing The Organization, Vol. 1, American
Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 417-453, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
12169-013
Hackman, J. and Lawler, E. (1971), “Employee reactions to job characteristics”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 55, pp. 259-286.
Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G.R. (1980), Work Redesign, Sage Publications: Addison-Wesley and
consequences, Reading, MA. and Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2011), “PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet”, Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 139-152.
Hatfield, J.D., Robinson, R.B. and Huseman, R.C. (1985), “An empirical evaluation of a test for assessing
job satisfaction”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 39-45.
Herscovitch, L. and Meyer, J.P. (2002), “Commitment to organizational change: extension of a three-
component model”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 3, pp. 474-487.
Herzberg, F. (1957), The Motivation to Work, 2nd ed., John Wiley.
Hoppock, R. (1935), Job Satisfaction, Harper, Oxford.
Irving, P.G., Coleman, D.F. and Cooper, C.L. (1997), “Further assessment of a three component model of
occupational commitment: generalizability and differences across occupations”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 3, pp. 444-452.
Ismail, N. (2012), “Organizational commitment and job satisfaction among staff of higher learning
education institutions in Kelantan”, Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Utara Malaysia.
Jacques, I. and Roussel, P. (1999), “A study of the relationship between compensation package, work
motivaiton and job satisfaction”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 1003-1025.
Jandaghi, G., Mokhles, A. and Bahrami, H. (2011), “The impact of job security on employees’
commitment and job satisfaction in Qom municipalities”, African Journal of Business
Management, Vol. 5 No. 16, pp. 6853-6858.
Jenkins, M. and Thomlinson, R.P. (1992), “Organizational commitment and job satisfaction
as predictors of employee turnover intentions”, Management Research News, Vol. 15 No. 10,
pp. 18-22.
Johns, R. (2005), “Determinants of organizational commitment among US workers”, Doctoral dissertation. Testing the
Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E. and Patton, G.K. (2001), “The job satisfaction–job performance effects of JS
relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 127 No. 3, on OC
pp. 376-407.
Juhdi, N. and Hamid, A.Z.A. (2009), “Job satisfaction and teaching role attributes of instructors in
higher learning institutions of Malaysia”, Unitar E-Journal, Vol. 5 No. 2.
Kazemipour, F., Mohamad Amin, S. and Pourseidi, B. (2012), “Relationship between workplace
spirituality and organizational citizenship behavior among nurses through mediation of
affective organizational commitment”, Journal of Nursing Scholarship, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 302-310.
Kiggundu, M. (1990), “An empirical test of the theory of job design using multiple job ratings”, Human
Relations, Vol. 33, pp. 339-351.
Kim, H. (2014), “Transformational leadership, organizational clan culture, organizational affective
commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior: a case of South Korea’s public sector”,
Public Organization Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 397-417.
Kornhauser, A.W. (1965), Mental Health of the Industrial, Worker, Wiley, New York, NY.
Krejcie, R.V. and Morgan, D.W. (1970), “Determining sample size for research activities”, Educational
and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 607-610.
Kuhnert, N.W., Sims, R.R. and Lahey, M.M. (1989), “The relationship between job security and
employee health”, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 399-410.
Kuria, K.S., Wanderi, M.P. and Ondigi, A. (2012), “Hotel employment in Kenya; contingent work or
professional career?”, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social
Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 7, p. 394.
Lambert, E. and Hogan, N. (2009), “The importance of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in
shaping turnover intent: a test of a causal model”, Criminal Justice Review, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 96-118.
Lan, G., Okechuku, C., Zhang, H. and Cao, J. (2013), “Impact of job satisfaction and personal values on
the work orientation of Chinese accounting practitioners”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 112
No. 4, pp. 627-640.
Lapointe, É., Vandenberghe, C. and Boudrias, J.S. (2013), “Psychological contract breach, affective
commitment to organization and supervisor, and newcomer adjustment: a three-wave
moderated mediation model”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 83 No. 3, pp. 528-538.
Locke, E.A. (1976), “The nature and causes of job satisfaction”, in Dunette, M. (Ed.), Handbook of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Loscocco, K.A. (1990), “Career structures and employee commitment”, Social Sciences Quarterly, Vol. 71,
pp. 53-68.
Malhotra, N. and Mukherjee, A. (2004), “The relative influence of organisational commitment and job
satisfaction on service quality of customer-contact employees in banking call centres”, Journal of
Service Market, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 162-174, doi: 10.1108/08876040410536477.
Malik (2010), “Motivation factors at university of Baluchistan”, Serbian Journal of Management, Vol. 5
No. 1, pp. 143-149.
Mao, H.-Y. (2006), “The relationship between organizational level and workplace friendship”,
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 17 No. 10, pp. 1819-1833, doi:
10.1080/09585190600965316.
McGee, G.W. and Ford, R.C. (1987), “Two (or more?) dimensions of organizational commitment:
reexamination of the affective and continuance commitment scales”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 72 No. 4, pp. 638-641.
McGregor, D. (1960), The Human Side of Enterprise, (McGraw-Hill Book Company), New York, NY,
pp. 1960.
Messner, W. (2013), “Effect of organizational culture on employee commitment in the Indian IT services
sourcing industry”, Journal of Indian Business Research, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 76-100.
JMD Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1984), “Testing the ‘side-bet theory’ of organizational commitment: some
methodological considerations”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 372-378.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1997), Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and Application, Sage.
Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002), “Affective, continuance, and
normative commitment to the organization: a meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and
consequences”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 20-52.
Miller, T. and Lee, R. (2001), “Evaluating the performance of the Lee-Carter approach to modeling and
forecasting mortality”, Demography, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 537-549.
Miller, R.I., Finley, C. and Vancko, C.S. (2000), Evaluating, Improving, and Judging Faculty Performance
in Two-Year Colleges, Greenwood Publishing Group.
Morgeson, F.P. and Humphrey, S.E. (2006), “The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): developing and
validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 6, pp. 1321-1339.
Moser, K. (1997), “Commitment in organizations”, Zeitschrift für Arbeits-und Organisations Psychologie,
Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 160-170.
Mowday, R., Porter, L. and Steers, R. (1982), “Employee organization linkages”, in Warr, P. (Ed.),
Organizational and Occupational Psychology, Academic Press, New York, NY.
Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M. and Porter, L.W. (1979), “The measurement of organizational commitment”,
Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 224-247.
Munirah, S., Halimahton, K. and Kadir, M.B.A. (2012), “Factor affecting organizational commitment
among lecturers in higher educational institution Malaysia”, Journal Pendidikan & Latihan
MARA, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 16-31.
Naumann, E. (1993), “Organizational predictors of expatriate job satisfaction”, Journal of International
Business Studies, Vol. 24, pp. 61-80.
Newstrom, J.W. and Davis, K. (2002), Organizational Behavior, 1th ed., McGrawHill Higher Education,
New York, NY.
O’Reilly, C.A. and Chatman, J. (1986), “Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: the
effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 492-499.
Parker, S.K. (2006), “A broaden-and-build model of work design: How job enrichment broadens
thought-action repertoires via positive affect”, paper presented at the annual conference of the
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.
Parker, S.K., Williams, H.M. and Turner, N. (2006), “Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at
work”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91, pp. 636-652.
Pfeffer, J. (2007), “Human resources from an organizational behavior perspective: some paradoxes
explained”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 115-134.
Podsakoff, P.M., KacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B. and Bachrach, D.G. (2000), “Organizational citizenship
behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future
research”, Journal of Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 513-563.
Poon, J.M. (2013), “Relationships among perceived career support, affective commitment, and work
engagement”, International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 48 No. 6, pp. 1148-1155.
Porter, L.W. and Smith, F.J. (1970), “The etiology of organizational commitment: a longitudinal study of
initial stages of employee-organization relationships”, Unpublished manuscript.
Ramayah, T. and Nasurdin, A.M. (2003), “Job satisfaction and organisational commitment differential
effects for men and women?”, Jurnal Manajemen & Bisnis, Program Magister Manajemen
Universitas Syiah Kuala, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 75-89.
Rego and Pina (2008), “Workplace spirituality and organizational commitment: an empirical study”,
Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 53-75.
Rehman, S., Shareef, A., Mahmood, A. and Ishaque, A. (2012), “Perceived leadership styles and Testing the
organizational commitment”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, effects of JS
Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 616-626.
on OC
Reijseger, G., Schaufeli, W.B., Peeters, M.C.W., Taris, T.W., Van Beek, I. and Ouweneel, E. (2013),
“Watching the paint dry at work: psychometric examination of the Dutch Boredom Scale”,
Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 508-525.
Rhoades, L. and Eisenberger, R. (2002), “Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 698-714.
Sabri, P.S.U., Ilyas, M. and Amjad, Z. (2011), “Organizational culture and its impact on the job
satisfaction of the University teachers of Lahore”, International Journal of Business and Social
Science, Vol. 2 No. 24.
Salleh, R., Nair, M.S. and Harun, H. (2012), “Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover
intention: a case study on employees of a retail company in Malaysia”, World Academy of
Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 72 No. 12, pp. 316-323.
Saragih, S. (2011), “The effects of job autonomy on work outcomes: self efficacy as an intervening
variable”, International Research Journal of Business Studies, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 203-215.
Scott, K.D. and Taylor, G.S. (1985), “An examination of conflicting findings on the relationship between
job satisfaction and absenteeism: a meta-analysis”, The Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 599-612.
Shah, F.T., Idrees, F., Imam, A., Khan, T.A. and Mariyam, A. (2014), “Impact of job satisfaction on
organizational commitment in IT sector employees of Pakistan”, Applied Environment Biol Sci,
Vol. 4 No. 8, pp. 190-197.
Sony, M. and Mekoth, N. (2016), “The relationship between emotional intelligence, frontline employee
adaptability, job satisfaction and job performance”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
Vol. 30, May, pp. 20-32.
Soumyaja, D., Kamalanabhan, T.J. and Bhattacharyya, S. (2011), “Employee commitment to
organizational change: test of the three-component model in Indian context”, Journal of
Transnational Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 239-251.
Spector, P.E. (1997), Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes and Consequences, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Spector, P.E., Fox, S., Penney, L.M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A. and Kessler, S. (2006), “The dimensionality
of counterproductivity: are all counter-productive behaviors created equal?”, Journal of
Vocational Behavior, Vol. 68 No. 3, pp. 446-460, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2005.10.005.
Testa, M. (2001), “Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and effort in the service environment”,
The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 135 No. 2, pp. 226-236.
Tran, K., Nguyen, P., Dang, T. and Ton, T. (2018), “The impacts of the high-quality workplace
relationships on job performance: a perspective on staff nurses in Vietnam”, Behavioral Sciences,
Vol. 8 No. 12, p. 109.
Trivellas, P., Gerogiannis, V. and Svarna, S. (2013), “Exploring Workplace Implications of Emotional
Intelligence (WLEIS) in Hospitals: job satisfaction and turnover intentions”, Procedia – Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 73, February, pp. 701-709.
Tsui, K.T. and Cheng, Y.C. (1999), “School organisational health and teacher commitment: a contigency
study with multi-level analysis”, Educational Research and Evaluation, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 249-268.
UGC Annual Report (2016/2017), “Higher education”, available at: www.ugc.ac.in/pdfnews/9764381_
Complete-AR-2016-17-English.pdf (accessed June 5, 2019).
Usop, A.M., Askandar, D.K., Langguyuan-Kadtong, M. and Usop, D.A.S.O. (2013), “Work performance
and job satisfaction among teachers”, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science,
Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 245-252.
Valaei, N. and Rezaei, S. (2016), “Job satisfaction and organizational commitment: an empirical
investigation among ICT-SMEs”, Management Research Review, Vol. 39 No. 12, pp. 1663-1694.
JMD Vandenberg, R.J. and Lance, C.E. (1992), “Examining the causal order of job satisfaction and
organizational commitment”, Journal of Management, Vol. 18, pp. 153-167, doi: 10.1177/
014920639201800110.
Vandenberghe, C. and Tremblay, M. (2008), “The role of pay satisfaction and organizational
commitment in turnover intentions: a two-sample study”, Journal of Business and Psychology,
Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 275-286.
Vander, J. and Wimsatt, L. (1999), “Cross-national faculty departure: development of a new model”,
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education,
San Antonio, TX.
Wang, Y., Lin, G. and Yang, Y. (2011), “Organizational socialization and employee job performance:
an examination on the role of the job satisfaction and organizational commitment”, Icsssm11,
pp. 1-5, available at: http://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSSM.2011.5959413
Wasti, S.A. (2003), “Organizational commitment, turnover intentions and the influence of cultural
values”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 303-321,
available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317903769647193
Weng, R.-H., Huang, C.-Y., Tsai, W.-C., Chang, L.-Y., Lin, S.-E. and Lee, M.-Y. (2010), “Exploring the
impact of mentoring functions on job satisfaction and organizational commitment of new staff
nurses”, BMC Health Services Research, Vol. 10, p. 240.
Yang, F.H., Wu, M., Chang, C.C. and Chien, Y. (2011), “Elucidating the relationships among
transformational leadership, job satisfaction, commitment foci and commitment bases in the
public sector”, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 265-278.
Yücel, I. (2012), “Examining the relationships among job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and
turnover intention: an empirical study”, International Journal of Business and Management,
Vol. 7 No. 20, pp. 44-59.
Zehir, C., Erdogan, E. and Basar, D. (2011), “The relationship among charismatic leadership, ethical
climate, job satisfaction and organizational commitment in companies”, Journal of Global
Strategic Management, Vol. 10, pp. 49-59.
Zehir, C., Müceldili, B. and Zehir, S. (2012), “The moderating effect of ethical climate on the relationship
between job satisfaction and organizational commitment: evidence from large companies in
Turkey”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 58, October, pp. 734-743.
Zeinabadia, H. (2010), “Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as antecedents of
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) of teachers”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral
Sciences, Vol. 5, pp. 998-1003.
Zopiatis, A., Constanti, P. and Theocharous, A.L. (2014), “Job involvement, commitment, satisfaction
and turnover: evidence from hotel employees in Cyprus”, Tourism Management, Vol. 41, April,
pp. 129-140.

Corresponding author
Barooj Bashir can be contacted at: bareshi111@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats