Encyclopedia of

MANAGEMEN
T
THEORY
VOLUME TWO

ERIC H. KESSLER EDITOR

Pace University

OSAGE reference
LosAngeles I London I New Delhi
Singapore I Washington DC
 OSAGE
Copyright 0 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced

Los Angeles I London I New or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or
Delhi Singapore Washington mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any
DC information storage and retrieval system, without permission
in writing from the publisher.
FOR INFORMATION:
Printed in the United States of America.
SAGE Publications, Inc.
2455 Teller Road Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Thousand Oaks, California
91320 E-mail: Encyclopedia of management theory / edited by Eric H.
order@sagepub.com Kessler, Pace University.

SAGE Publications Ltd. v. cm

1 Oliver's Yard Includes bibliographical references and index.
55 City Road
London, ECIY ISP ISBN 978-1-41299782-9 (hbk.)
United Kingdom
I. Management—Encyclopedias. I. Kessler, Eric
SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
B 1/1 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial
H., editor of compilation
Area
Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044 HD30.1S.E493 2013
India 658.001—dc23 2012039568

SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific

Pte. Ltd.
3 Church Street
#10-04 Samsung Hub
Singapore 049483

Publisher: Rolf A. danke

Acquisitions Editor: Jim Brace-
Thompson
Developmental Editor: Sanford
Certified Sourcing
Robinson
www.sfiprogram.org
Production Editor: David C. Felts
SFl-00453
Reference Systems Manager: Leticia

526 Organizational Commitment Theory

Gutierrez
Reference Systems Coordinator:
Anna Villasefior Copy Editors: Linda
Gray, Patrice Sutton Typesetter:
Hurix Systems Pvt. Ltd. 13 14 15 16 17 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
Proofreaders: Jeff Bryant, Sue Irwin
Indexer: Wendy Allex 1
Cover Designer: Glenn Vogel Further Readings
Marketing Manager: Carmel Schrire Gailliard, B., Myers, K. K., & Seibold, D. R. (2010).
Organizational assimilation: A multidimensional
 reconceptualization
and measure.
Management
Communication
Quarterly, 24, 552
—578.
Jablin, F. (2001).
Organizational entry,
assimilation, and exit.
In E Jablin & L.
Putnam (Eds.), The
new handbook of
organizational
communication (pp.
732—818). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Louis, M. (1980). Surprise and
sense-making: What
newcomers experience
when entering unfamiliar
organizational settings.
Administrative Science
Quarterly, 23, 225-251.
McPhee, R. D., & Zaug,
P. (2000). The
communicative
constitution of
organizations: A antecedent of other important attitudes and
framework for
explanation. Electronic
Journal of
Communication/ La
Revue Electronique de
Communication,
10(1/2).
Retrieved from
http://www.cios.org/getfile
/ organizational commitment has grown in
MCPHEE_VION1200
Miller, V., & Jablin, F. (1991).
Information seeking during
organizational entry:
Influences, tactics, and a
model of the process.
Academy of Management
Review, 16, 92-120.
Scott, C. W., & Myers, K. K.
(2010). Toward an
integrative theoretical
perspective of membership
negotiations: Socialization,
assimilation, and the duality
of structure.
Communication Theory,
20, 79—105.
Waldeck, J., & Myers, K. K. (2007). Organizational
assimilation theory, research, and implications for
multiple divisions of the discipline: A state of the art
review. In C. S. Beck (Ed.), Communication yearbook 31,
(pp. 322—369). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
THEORY
Organizational commitment (OC) is, in general
terms, an employee's sense of attachment and
loyalty to the work organization with which the
employee is associated. It is defined in terms of
an employee's attitudes and intentions
(understood as the precursors of behavior).
Employees are said to be committed to the
organization when their goals are congruent
with those of the organization, when they are
willing to exert effort on behalf of the
organization, and when they desire to maintain
their connection with the organization.
Unsurprisingly, OC has been shown to be a key
behaviors, including those related to
performance and turnover. For instance, a large
body of research suggests that organizations
whose members have higher levels of
commitment tend to get more out of those
members, in terms of higher in-role and extra-
role performance and lower levels of
absenteeism and lateness. The study of
popularity over recent years in the literature of
management, industrial-organizational
psychology, and organizational behavior.
Indeed, OC is among the most studied of all the
characteristics and attitudes that have drawn the
attention of organizational scholars. Much of
this interest is due to the fact that OC appears to
predict some organizational outcomes,
including extra-role performance and turnover,
better than other work attitudes, such as job
satisfaction. This entry reviews the dominant
theories of organizational commitment from the
1960s to the present day and concludes with
possible directions for the future development
of this theory.
 Fundamentals
Organizational scholars began
seriously to conceptualize the
notion of OC, and to delineate
its antecedents and
consequences, in the 1960s.
Since then, the growing
interest in OC has contributed
to a conceptual richness in
how we understand this
construct. Over the years,
there have been three main
approaches to defining and
measuring OC: the calculative
approach, the attitudinal
approach, and the
multidimensional approach.
These will now be described
in turn.
The Calculative Approach
The calculative approach rests
on the "side bet" theory of
Howard Becker. Becker
introduced this term in the 1960s
to refer to the accumulation of
investments valued by the
individual that would be lost or
deemed worthless if he or she
were to leave the organization. In
gambling, a side bet is a wager
that is separate from the main bet
or stakes in the game being
played; for instance, two players
in a card game might bet on
whose hand holds the highest
spade. Becker argued that over
time, economic, social, and other
investments—side bets—such as
income, status, seniority, and
friendships, even simply
"knowing the ropes," tie people
to a particular line of activity.
The threat of losing these
investments,
along with a perceived lack of
alternatives to replace or make
up for them, commits the
person to the organization.
Measures reflecting this
approach were developed in
the late 1960s and the 1970s. These measures
question respondents on the likelihood of their
leaving the organization, given various levels of
inducement in pay, status, responsibility, job
freedom, and promotion opportunities.
The Attitudinal Approach
The second approach, also called the
"organizational behavior" or "psychology" approach,
sees commitment as affective or attitudinal. According
to the attitudinal approach, employees feel committed
to the organization because they identify with the
organization's values and goals. More specifically,
commitment under this approach has three dimensions:
(a) a desire to maintain membership in the
organization, (b) belief in and acceptance of the values
and goals of the organization, and (c) willingness to
exert effort on behalf of the organization. Commitment
under the attitudinal approach has also been termed
affective commitment and value commitment.
The attitudinal approach gave rise to one of the
most important measures of OC, the Organizational
Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ), which
dominated the literature from the early 1970s to the
mid1980s. The OCQ consists of 15 items (a
shortened version has nine positively phrased items)
reflecting the three dimensions of commitment.
Some studies noted that the relationships between
this measure and some attitudinal variables, such as
job satisfaction and job involvement, were too high
for an acceptable level of discriminant validity.
However, in separate examinations of the OCQ,
other researchers supported the general conclusion
that it contains good psychometric properties.
Because of the OCQ's dominance, most findings,
conclusions, and proposals for a future research
agenda on OC are based on this measure. But in the
mid-1980s, new criticisms began to arise regarding
this approach. The basic difficulty is that two of the
dimensions of commitment in the OCQ, a strong
desire to maintain membership in the organization
and a willingness to exert considerable effort on
Organizational Commitment Theory 527
behalf of the organization, overlap with intentions
of outcome behaviors such as withdrawal and
performance. The response to that criticism has
taken two directions. First, since the items in
the full measure that deal with withdrawal and
performance are among the six problematic items
which are negatively phrased, researchers have
tended to use the nine-item
version of the OCQ more
frequently than the full 15-
item version. Second, a new
trend has evolved in the
definition and measurement
of OC.
The Multidimensional
Approach
Arguing that OC can
be better understood as a
multidimensional
concept, two scholars—
John P. Meyer and
Natalie Jean Allen—
proposed in 1984 a two-
dimensional measure of
OC. Conceptually, their
distinction between the
two dimensions paralleled
that between the side-bet
Organizational Commitment Theory
calculative approach of
Becker and the attitudinal
approach. The first
dimension was termed
affective commitment and
was defined as positive
feelings of identification
with, attachment to, and
involvement in, the work
organization. The second
was termed continuance
commitment and was
defined as the extent to
which employees feel
committed to their
organizations by virtue of
the costs that they feel are
associated with leaving
(e.g., investments or lack
of attractive alternatives).
Later, the scholars added
a third dimension: normative commitment,
defined as employees' feelings of obligation to
remain with the organization.
The multidimensional approach is today the
prevailing approach to OC. However, the
theory remains in flux. For instance, some
studies have found that continuance
commitment is itself a two-dimensional
construct, with one subdimension representing
the sacrifices made by an employee in staying
with the organization (this is termed
highsacrifice continuance commitment) and the
other representing available employment
alternatives (low-alternatives continuance
commitment). For this reason, some scholars
argue that commitment should be studied as a
four-component model. In addition, the
normative commitment scale is very highly
correlated with the affective dimension of OC,
raising concerns about the discriminant validity
of the normative scale. In short, scholars have
raised serious questions about the validity and
reliability of two of the three dimensions
advanced by the multidimensional approach,
and much work still needs to be done before
this approach can be used to draw firm
conclusions.
Importance
Aside from these questions about the various approaches
to the study of organizational commitment, researchers
have raised more general concerns about the usefulness
of OC as a predictive tool. The basic test of commitment
—as for any other construct—is its predictive validity.
OC has shown modest relationships with turnover and
weak correlations with in-role performance. It does show
relatively high correlations with organizational
citizenship behavior (OCB), or extra-role behavior. This
raise the question of whether the real power of OC is its
ability to predict OCB, as opposed to in-role
performance—a question that should be considered in
future research.
Another promising direction for future research
is the adoption of a multiple-commitment
approach. Some scholars have begun to examine
simultaneously several foci of commitment in the
workplace, including not
only the organization but
also the workgroup, the job,
the union, and the
occupation. Several forces
have advanced this
approach. First, there is
growing awareness that in
the workplace, as in life
generally, people can and
do show commitment to
more than one focus at the
same time. For a real
understanding of
commitment in the
workplace, it is therefore
necessary to examine more
than one object of
commitment.
Second, changes in the
work environment
worldwide, particularly
recent and continuing
recessions in many
economies, have led many
organizations to reduce their
workforces. Many have
simply cut back, while
others have turned to
outsourcing— contracting
jobs and tasks previously
performed in-house to
external providers. This has
led, in turn, to a decline in
the importance of the
organization from the
employees' point of view.
The result is that in many
occupations across many
countries, organizations do
not want to be tied to
employees, and employees
do not want to be tied to
organizations. Long-term
commitment is no longer
seen as desirable, and
organizations no longer put
effort into creating a
commitment culture.
There is some evidence that the move toward a
multiple-commitment approach will increase the
predictive validity of commitment. However, it is still
too early to tell how fruitful this approach will prove.
Do employees really distinguish among all the
different possible foci of commitment at work, or are
we researchers developing concepts that do not have
strong meaning for employees? Concept redundancy
and measurement problems may yet prove to bedevil
the multiple-commitment approach. This is another
important issue that needs to be examined in future
research on commitment.
Better understanding of commitment theory has
important practical implications for modern managers.
First, by understanding what commitment entails for
individual employees, managers may be better able to
motivate them and increase their contribution to the
organization. For instance, employees with higher
levels of affective commitment may respond
positively to work-sponsored social events, while
employees with higher levels of calculative
commitment might need more tangible incentives,
such as the promise of pay raises. This may be
particularly relevant for international managers, as
commitment may have different meanings,
antecedents, and implications in different cultures.
Second, an understanding of how commitment
can extend to multiple foci might allow managers
to characterize employees by commitment
profiles. This can provide valuable practical
information for employers. For example, which
profile of commitment has the best fit to the
organization in terms of employees' behavior in
the workplace? Which profile of commitment is
better from the viewpoint of the employee's well
being? Commitment profiles can assist
organizations in both selection and maintenance
of human resource functions. If organizations
know which profiles are more beneficial for them
they can integrate some of this knowledge into
their selection criteria. Also, they can include and
increase the relevant commitments through their
training programs. Commitment profiles can also
be related to nonwork domains, potentially
offering a means by which employers can help
employees to better cope with the sometimes
competing demands of work and nonwork.
Career management, both through individual
career planning and through household planning,
may improve career commitment and, to a lesser
degree, organizational commitment.
Organizations, therefore, might benefit from
programs intended to aid employees in planning
their careers and managing
household activities that
might interfere with work-
related commitments.
Understanding these
aspects can assist in finding
positive ways to effect
commitment forms. Aaron
Cohen
consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20—
52.
Morrow, P. C. (1983). Concept redundancy in organizational
research: The case of work commitment.
Academy of Management Review, 8, 486—500.
Morrow, P. C. (1993). The theory and measurement of work
commitment. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. M., & Steers, R. M. (1982).
Employee-organizational linkage. New York, NY:
Organizational Culture and Effectiveness 529

See also Affect Theory; Authentic Academic Press.

Leadership; Reichers, A. E. (1985). A review and reconceptualization of
Management Roles; Organizational organizational commitment. Academy of Management
Culture Theory; Review, 10, 465-476.
Organizational Identity; Social
Exchange Theory; Social
Identity Theory; Trust

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND

Further Readings
EFFECTIVENESS
Becker, H. S. (1960). Notes on the
concept of commitment.
American Journal of Sociology, Organizational culture encompasses the system of
66, 32—40.
beliefs, assumptions, values, and norms held by the
Cohen, A. (1993).
Organizational commitment
members of an organization. Over the past 30 years,
and turnover: A meta- scholars of management and organizational science
analysis. Academy of have advanced a number of theoretical perspectives
Management Journal, 36, to explain how culture impacts organizational
1140-1157. effectiveness. The purpose of this entry is to
Cohen, A. (2003). Multiple provide an overview of the major theories and what
commitments in the workplace: they contribute to our generalized understanding of
An integrative approach. the culture-effectiveness relationship.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence These theories can be broadly categorized into
Erlbaum. process-oriented and resource-based perspectives.
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. The process-oriented perspective follows from an
(1990). A review and anthropological tradition (and more recently,
metaanalysis of the antecedents, organizational psychology) and considers how
correlates and consequences of
organizational cultures—as systems—evolve in
organizational commitment.
Psychological Bulletin, 108,
response to environmental demands. The resource-
171-194. based perspective is rooted in economics and
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). describes the macro factors that allow culture to
Commitment in the workplace: serve as a source of competitive advantage for the
Theory, research, and firm. The modern dimensionalized view of
application. Thousand Oaks, organizational culture is evident in both theoretical
CA: Sage. perspectives, providing the framework for
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, J. D., comparing organizational cultures and studying the
Herscovitch, L., & existence and nature of culture-effectiveness
Topolnytsky, L. (2002). relationships. In light of growing evidence pointing
Affective, continuance, and to culture .as an important antecedent of various
normative commitment to the organizational performance outcomes (for a recent
organization: A meta-analysis
overview of this literature, see Sonja Sackmann,
of antecedents, correlates, and
2011), these theories hold are the kinds of cultural values, norms, and work
particular relevance for practices
management scholars
interested in human-social
factors as drivers of
organizational effectiveness.

Fundamentals
The process theory linking
culture to effectiveness is
perhaps best illustrated by
Edgar Schein's work
beginning in the early 1980s.
Schein described culture as
an adaptive feature of
organizations with a
recursive relationship with
the organization's
effectiveness. Founding
leaders implant their
personal values and
assumptions within the
organizations they create. As
the group struggles to
overcome competitive
pressures and succeed
together as an organization,
the culture evolves and
becomes deeply ingrained.
As a consequence of this
process unfolded over time,
the organization's culture
comes to reflect the
collective learning of the
group regarding what works
and what doesn't (i.e., what
is effective). Cultural
elements and practices that
inhibit the organization's
effectiveness are eventually
abandoned in favor of those
that promote effectiveness
and increase the likelihood
that the organization will
survive and flourish. If
culture does not adapt to
meet changing demands, the
organization may face crisis
or even perish.
Thus, culture shapes, and
is shaped by, the
organization's successes and
failures. Yet two main
questions remain for
theories to address: What