alexa
Reach Us +44-1522-440391
THE CORRELATION BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AND JOB SATISFACTION WITH A PERCEPTION OF PERFORMANCE EVALUTION | OMICS International
ISSN: 2162-6359
International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business
All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AND JOB SATISFACTION WITH A PERCEPTION OF PERFORMANCE EVALUTION

Ali Erbasi1, Tugay Arat2, Osman Unuvar3

1Selcuk University Vocational School of Social Sciences, Konya, Turkey. E-mail: [email protected]

2Selcuk University Vocational School of Social Sciences, Konya, Turkey. E-mail: [email protected]

3Selcuk University Seydisehir Vocational School, Konya, Turkey. E-mail: [email protected]

Visit for more related articles at International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences

Keywords

Performance evaluation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, textile, job status.

INTRODUCTION

The process of performance evaluation is important in terms of strategic management. Therefore, this process of performance evaluation must be designed very effectively, because the results obtained from this performance evaluation are crucial not only for operational decisions, but also for tactical and strategic decisions. In this view, the perceptions about the functioning of performance evaluation system are important in terms of the success of the system. Different perceptions must be taken into consideration on performance evaluation in order to obtain more significant input for the strategic management. Moreover, the examination of the correlations between job satisfaction and organizational commitment on their perceptions at different levels will make great contributions to the functioning a smoother process.

There are several studies examining the correlation between job performance and job satisfaction available in the literature (Judge et al., 2001: 376-407; Becker et al., 1996: 464-482; Lee et al., 1990: 870-881; Pritchard and Karasick, 1973: 126-146; Green and Heywood, 2008: 710-728; Judge, 2009: 58-62; Vecchio et al., 2008: 71-82; Yazıcıoğlu, 2010: 243-264; Gül et al., 2008: 1-11; Berg, 1999: 111-135). Besides, there are also a lot of studies which examine the correlation between job performance and organizational commitment (Jaramillo et al., 2005: 705-714; Wright and Bonett, 2002: 1183-1190; Lok and Crawford, 1999: 365-374; Somers and Birnbaum, 1998: 621-634; Williams and Anderson, 1991: 601-617; Sagie, 1998: 156-171; Gaertner, 1999: 479-493; Yousef, 2000: 6-24; Lok and Crawford, 2001: 594-613; Silverthorne, 2004: 592-599; İraz and Akgün, 2011: 225-250; Brockner et al., 2004: 76-100; Yousef, 2002: 250-266; Riketta, 2002: 257-266; Kuokkanen et al., 2003: 184-192; Xiong et al., 2002: 339-356; Chen et al., 2006: 242-249; Siu, 2003: 337-347; Scotter, 2000: 79-95; Wech et al., 1998: 472-494; Leong, 1994: 57-63; Chen and Francesco, 2003: 490-510; Suliman and Iles, 2000: 407-422). It is possible to increase the number of these examples.

However, the number of studies focusing on the perceptions of performance is quite limited. Çakmak (2005), one of the researchers, who conducted a study on this subject, developed an efficacy model for performance evaluation system in order to evaluate and assess this performance evaluation system effectively and in an effective point of view. There revealed 8 perceptions in this study, which affects the points of view on performance evaluation system. These levels of perception are effective application, system knowledge, participation, justice, and satisfaction of evaluator, expected benefits, efficacy and general satisfaction. These dimensions can be best described in such ways (Çakmak, 2005:6):

Effective Application: The beliefs on the effective application of available evaluation system

System Knowledge: The beliefs on how much the employees understand the evaluation system

Participation: The perceptions of employees on the extent to which they have a voice in evaluation system

Justice: The opinions of employees on how fair they believe the evaluation system is

Satisfaction of Evaluators: The beliefs of employees in terms of performance evaluation on how sufficient they think the managers are, who are currently the evaluators of their employees.

Expected Benefits: The benefits, which are expected from the evaluation system in the institutions by the employees

Efficacy: The perceptions of employees; on the extent to which they believe the available evaluation system is for the institution.

General Satisfaction: The general satisfaction perceived by the employees on the available evaluation system

In our study, 8 perceptions described in the efficacy model of performance evaluation system and prepared by Çakmak (2005) in order to determine the perceptions of employees and managers on the performance evaluation system. Minnesota Job Satisfaction Scale is used to determine the levels of job satisfaction and commitment scale proposed by Meyer and Allen (1991) is used to determine the levels of organizational commitment.

The purpose of this study is to examine the correlation between job satisfaction and organizational commitment with the perceptions on performance evaluation system by the employees and managers. Also, it is revealed in this study, which correlations there are between job satisfaction and organizational commitment; and the differentiation levels in terms of job status (employee-manager) for various dimension of performance evaluation system. The research model prepared for this purpose is given in Figure 1.

economics-management-sciences-model

Figure 1: The Model of the Study

There are 26 hypotheses in the framework of this study in order to test the differentiation in the perceptions of performance evaluation system in terms of job status (H1-H8); to test the differentiation in job satisfaction (H9) and organizational commitment (H10) in terms of job status; and to test the correlations between job satisfaction (H11-H18) and organizational commitment (H19-H26) in the perceptions of performance evaluation system.

H1: Perceptions of effective application differ in terms of job status.

H2: Perceptions of system knowledge differ in terms of job status.

H3: Perceptions of participation differ in terms of job status.

H4: Perceptions of justice differ in terms of job status.

H5: Perceptions of satisfaction of evaluators differ in terms of job status.

H6: Perceptions of expected benefit differ in terms of job status.

H7: Perceptions of efficacy differ in terms of job status.

H8: Perceptions of general satisfaction differ in terms of job status.

H9: Levels of job satisfaction differ in terms of job status.

H10: Levels of organizational commitment differ in terms of job status.

H11: There is a correlation between the perceptions of effective application and job satisfaction.

H12: There is a correlation between the perceptions of system knowledge and job satisfaction.

H13: There is a correlation between the perceptions of participation and job satisfaction.

H14: There is a correlation between the perceptions of justice and job satisfaction.

H15: There is a correlation between the perceptions of satisfaction of evaluators and job satisfaction.

H16: There is a correlation between the perceptions of expected benefits and job satisfaction

H17: There is a correlation between the perceptions of efficacy and job satisfaction

H18: There is a correlation between the perceptions of general satisfaction and job satisfaction.

H19: There is a correlation between the perceptions of effective application and organizational commitment.

H20: There is a correlation between the perceptions of system knowledge and organizational commitment.

H21: There is a correlation between the perceptions of participation and organizational commitment.

H22: There is a correlation between the perceptions of justice and organizational commitment.

H23: There is a correlation between the perceptions of satisfaction of evaluators and organizational commitment.

H24: There is a correlation between the perceptions of expected benefits and organizational commitment.

H25: There is a correlation between the perceptions of efficacy and organizational commitment.

H26: There is a correlation between the perceptions of general satisfaction and organizational commitment.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The method of field study is used in this research and survey technique is preferred to obtain data. The survey forms are compiled in terms of the research purposes after going through all studies previously conducted to see perceptions of performance, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. In the survey, which is consisted of four main parts, the first part is prepared by Çakmak (2005) basing on the survey questions, which is applied at a public institution and compiled by a thorough literature review by taking psychometric and theoretical principles into consideration in order to examine the efficacy of performance evaluation system from an evaluating and assessing points of view. Therefore, some modifications have been made to increase the understandability of the application, however nothing is changed in the content of the questions in this process.

In this view, 4 items are used to measure the perception of effective application, 11 for system knowledge; 9 for perception of participation; 12 for perception of justice; 9 for perception of satisfaction of evaluator; 7 for perception of expected benefits, 1 for perception of efficacy and 4 for perception of general satisfaction. There are 57 questions in the first part for the employees. In the second part of the survey, a short form of 20 questions by Minnesota Job Satisfaction Scale is used to determine the job satisfaction levels of the employees. In the third part of the survey, a three dimensional organizational commitment scale developed by Meyer and Allen (1991) is used to determine the organizational commitment of employees. In this organizational commitment scale, which is consisted of 18 questions, the first six items are preferred to see emotional commitment, the second six items for continual commitment and the last six items for normative commitment. In the fourth part of the survey, there are 14 items prepared by the researchers to determine the demographic characteristics of participants. 5-item Likert type scale is used to see the levels of participation in survey questions.

The population of the study involves 200 people selected by random among the personnel in three textile factories, currently operating in Turkey. No names are used on the demand of the relevant institutions. As a means of measurement, the surveys are applied by face-to-face interviews in the first week of March, 2012. However, the forms determined to be void in a subsequent examination of the surveys, are cancelled. Hence, a group of 191 people is reached in the study (157 employees and 34 managers). There is no other limitation in the study than selecting only a group of people by random in three textile factories. The significance level is determined to be 0.05 in the study. The packet program SPSS 16.0 is used to code and decode the data obtained from this study and appropriate statistical analyses are used to test the hypotheses.

Before applying the surveys to the personnel, they are corrected or edited when needed by consulting an advisor. Then, the surveys are tested in terms of its reliability if the answers of participants are coherent. Therefore, the survey is applied to a pilot group, consisting of 10 managers and 30 employees, selected by random among the institutions of this application, and the answers are measured if they are coherent to each other. Some questions, which require demographic information and limit the perceptions in this process, are turned into open-ended questions. Therefore, the reliability coefficient of the survey is calculated as 0.85 (Cronbach Alpha Value). This number indicates that the results of the study are reliable at a sufficient level. Separate Cronbach Alpha values are calculated for three parts, except for the one involving the demographic characteristics in the survey form and they are shown in Table 1.

Survey Parts Cronbach Alpha
Reliability Coefficient
Perception of Performance 0.84
Job Satisfaction 0.86
Organizational Commitment 0.85
All Scale 0.85

Table 1. Reliability Coefficients

3. FINDINGS

Table 2 indicates some information on the demographic characteristics of participants in the study.

Demographic Characteristics n % Demographic Characteristics n %
Gender     Job Position    
Male 76 39.8 Employee 157 82.2
Female 115 60.2 Manager 34 17.8
Total 191 100.0 Total 191 100.0
Marital Status     Age    
Married 103 53.9 18-25 93 48.7
Single 88 46.1 26-35 59 30.9
Total 191 100.0 36-49 39 20.4
Education     Total 191 100.0
Primary 74 38.7 Working Years in the Institution    
Secondary 100 52.4 Less than a year 104 54.5
Two-Year 7 3.7 1-3 years 28 14.7
Undergraduate 10 5.2 4-7 years 33 17.3
Total 191 100.0 8-11 years 20 10.5
Experience in the sector     12 years of above 6 3.1
Less than a year 92 48.2 Total 191 100.0
  1-3 years   36   18.8 Education on Performance
Management (Planning, Assessment, Evaluation, Development, etc.)
   
4-7 years 28 14.7 Yes 73 38.2
8-11 years 22 11.5 No 118 61.8
12 years or above 13 6.8 Total 191 100.0
Total 191 100.0      
Expectancy for Frequency of Performance Evaluation          
Once a month 114 59.7      
Once in three months 28 14.2      
Once in six months 27 14.1      
Once a year 4 2.1      
Irregular periods 18 9.4      
Total 191 100.0      

Table 2. Demographic Characteristics of Participants in the Study

Independent Samples T-Test is used to test to see the difference between the perceptions of employees and managers at all levels in this study in terms of their job status. The findings gathered are given in Table 3.

Perception of Performance Evaluation Job Status n   t p
Effective Application Employee 157 3.68 -0.684 0.495
Manager 34 3.79
System Knowledge Employee 157 3.57 -1.703 0.090
Manager 34 3.82
Participation Employee 157 3.44 -0.955 0.341
Manager 34 3.59
Justice Employee 157 3.78 1.183 0.238
Manager 34 3.58
Satisfaction of Evaluator Employee 157 3.91 1.296 0.197
Manager 34 3.71
Expected Benefits Employee 154 3.77 1.423 0.156
Manager 34 3.51
Efficacy Employee 157 2.98 1.922 0.056
Manager 34 2.44
General Satisfaction Employee 157 3.96 1.012 0.313
Manager 34 3.58

Table 3. The correlation between the perception of performance evaluation and job status

According to these results, no significant difference is observed in terms of job status at any of these perceptions of performance evaluation. Therefore, the hypotheses called H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7 and H8 are all refuted.

Independent Samples T-Test is used to test to see the difference in job satisfaction levels of the participants in this study in terms of their job status. The findings gathered are given in Table 4. According to the analysis results, the average levels of job satisfaction are very close when the employees and managers are separately examined. There is no significant difference between job satisfaction and job status on 0.05 significance level. Therefore, the hypothesis called H9 is refuted.

Job Status n   t p
Employee 157 3.57 0.069 0.945
Manager 34 3.56

Table 4. The correlation between job status and job satisfaction

Independent Samples T-Test is used to test to see the difference in organizational commitment of the participants in this study in terms of their job status. The findings gathered are given in Table 5. According to the analysis results, there is a significant difference between job status and organizational commitment. It is seen that the organizational commitment of managers is( =3.85), which is higher than the employees with ( =3.49). Therefore, the hypothesis called H10 is accepted.

Job Status n   t p
Employee 157 3.49 -2.612 0.012*
Manager 34 3.85

Table 5. The correlation between job status and organizational commitment

Correlation Analysis is used in the study to determine the correlations between job satisfaction and organizational commitment of the employees with their perceptions of evaluation. The data obtained are given in Table 6. Therefore, it is seen that there is a low level negative and significant correlation between perception of efficacy and job satisfaction (r=-0.144, p=0.048). It is claimed that the more perception of efficacy, the less job satisfaction (Hypothesis 17 accepted). It is seen that there is a significant correlation between job satisfaction and perceptions of general satisfaction and effective application (Hypotheses 11 and 18 refuted). It is seen that there is a low level positive and significant correlation between system knowledge perceived and job satisfaction (r=0.159, p=0.048). It is claimed that the more the system knowledge, the more job satisfaction (Hypothesis 12 accepted). It is seen that there is a low level positive and significant correlation between perception of participation and job satisfaction (r=0.174, p=0.016). Therefore, it is seen that the more perceptions of participation, the more job satisfaction (Hypothesis 13 accepted). It is seen that there is a low level positive and significant correlation between perception of justice and job satisfaction (r=0.157, p=0.030). Therefore the more perception of justice, the more job satisfaction (Hypothesis 14 accepted). It is seen that there is a low level positive and significant correlation between perception of satisfaction of evaluator and job satisfaction (r=0.190, p=0.008). It is claimed that the more perceptions of satisfaction of evaluators, the more job satisfaction (Hypothesis 15 accepted). It is seen that there is a medium level positive and significant correlation between perception of expected benefits and job satisfaction (r=0.250, p=0.005). Therefore, it is claimed that the more perceptions of expected benefits, the more job satisfaction (Hypothesis 16 accepted).

Perceptions of Performance Evaluation Correlation Analysis Job Satisfaction Organizational Commitment
  Spearman’s rho .011 -.043
Effective Application P 0.875 0.555
  N 191 191
  Spearman’s rho .159 .060
System Knowledge P 0.028* 0.413
  N 191 191
  Spearman’s rho .174 .139
Participation P 0.016* 0.055
  N 191 191
  Spearman’s rho .157 .119
Justice P 0.030* 0.102
  N 191 191
  Spearman’s rho .190 .152
Satisfaction of Evaluator P 0.008** 0.036*
  N 191 191
  Spearman’s rho .250 .159
Expected Benefits P 0.005** 0.028*
  N 191 191
  Spearman’s rho -.144 -.069
Efficacy P 0.048* 0.346
  N 191 191
  Spearman’s rho -.139 .155
General Satisfaction P 0.054 0.032*
  N 191 191

Table 6. The correlation between job satisfaction and organizational commitment with the perceptions of performance evaluation

According to the data in Table 6, there is no significant correlation between organizational commitment and the perceptions of effective application, system knowledge, participation and efficacy (Hypotheses H19, H20, H21 and H25 refuted). It is seen that there is a low level positive and significant correlation between perception of general satisfaction and organizational commitment (r=0.155, p=0.032). Therefore the more perceptions of general satisfaction, the more organizational commitment (Hypothesis 26 accepted). It is seen that there is a low level positive and significant correlation between perception of justice and organizational commitment (r=0.119, p=0.102). Therefore, it is claimed that the more perceptions of justice, the more organizational commitment (Hypothesis 22 accepted). It is seen that there is a low level positive and significant correlation between perception of satisfaction of evaluator and organizational commitment (r=0.152, p=0.036). Therefore, it is claimed that the more perceptions of satisfaction of evaluator, the more organizational commitment (Hypothesis 23 accepted). It is seen that there is a low level positive and significant correlation between perception of expected benefits and organizational commitment (r=0.159, p=0.028). Therefore, it is claimed that the more perceptions of expected benefits, the more organizational commitment (Hypothesis 24 accepted).

4. CONCLUSION

The examination of perceptions on performance evaluation system by employees and managers in terms of job satisfaction and organizational commitment will present very significant data for strategic management board. Therefore, these surveys are prepared and applied to the employees and managers at three textile factories currently operation in Turkey. There are 26 hypotheses developed in order to reveal the results of the study in a clear way. 8 of these hypotheses are to examine the differentiation levels of perceptions on performance evaluations in terms of job status (employee – manager); 1 of them is to examine the differentiation levels of job satisfaction in terms of job status;1 of them is to examine the differentiation levels of organizational commitment in terms of job status; 8 of them to examine the differentiation levels of perceptions on performance evaluations in terms of job satisfaction; and 8 of them to examine the differentiation levels of perceptions on performance evaluations in terms of organizational commitment. When the data obtained from this study are evaluated, it is seen that there is no differentiation in these 8 perceptions on performance evaluation system in terms of job status; no significant correlation between job status and job satisfaction; and a higher rate of organizational commitment for managers than employees. Besides, it is also seen that the perceptions of system knowledge, participation, justice and efficacy affect the job satisfaction; the perceptions of general satisfaction affect the organizational commitment; the perceptions of satisfaction of evaluators and expected benefits affect both job satisfaction and organizational commitment to a significant extent.

This study is important to reveal the effects of the perceptions of performance evaluation systems on job satisfaction and organizational commitment and the differentiations in terms of job status. There is no other limitation in this study than selecting only three textile factories and applying these surveys to a group of personnel in these factories by random. Future studies may increase the number of institutions to see the general perception in textile sector. In addition, the method developed in this study may also be used for institutions in other sectors.

REFERENCES

Becker Thomas E., Billings Robert S., Eveleth Daniel M. and Gilbert Nicole L. (1996). Foci and Bases of Employee Commitment: Implications for Job Performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 39 (2): 464-482.
Berg Peter (1999). The Effects of High Performance Work Practices on Job Satisfaction in the United States Steel Industry. Industrial Relations, 54 (1): 111-135.
Brockner Joel, Spreitzer Gretchen, Mishra Aneil, Hochwarter Wayne, Pepper Lewis and Weinberg Janice (2004). Perceived Control as an Antidote to the Negative Effects of Layoffs on Survivors' Organizational Commitment and Job Performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49 (1): 76-100.
Chen Jui-Chen, Silverthorne Colin and Hung Jung-Yao (2006). Organization communication, job stress, organizational commitment, and job performance of accounting professionals in Taiwan and America. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27 (4): 242-249.
Chen Zhen Xiong and Francesco Anne Marie (2003). The relationship between the three components of commitment and employee performance in China. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62 (3): 490-510.
Çakmak Ahmet F. (2005). Performans Değerleme Sistemi Etkinliğinin Değerleyici ve Değerlenen Bakış Açısından İncelenmesi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, İstanbul.
Gaertner Stefan (1999). Structural Determinants of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment in Turnover Models. Human Resource Management Review, 9 (4): 479-493.
Green Colin and Heywood John S. (2008). Does Performance Pay Increase Job Satisfaction?. Economica, 75, 710-728.
Gül Hasan, Oktay Ercan and Gökçe Hakan (2008). İş Tatmini, Stres, Örgütsel Bağlılık, İşten Ayrılma Niyeti ve Performans Arasındaki İlişkiler: Sağlık Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. Akademik Bakış  Dergisi,  Ekim (15): 1-11.
İraz Rıfat and Akgün Özlem (2011). Örgütsel Bağlılığın Çalışan Performansı Üzerine Etkilerini Ölçmeye Yönelik Bir Çalışma. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 14 (1-2): 225- 250.
Jaramillo Fernando, Mulki Jay Prakash and Marshall Greg W. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational commitment and salesperson job performance: 25 years of research. Journal of Business Research, 58 (6): 705-714.
Judge Timothy A. (2009). Core Self-Evaluations and Work Success. Psychological Science, 18 (1): 58-62.
Judge Timothy A., Thoresen Carl J., Bono Joyce E. and Patton Gregory K. (2001). The job satisfaction–job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin. 127 (3): 376- 407.
Kuokkanen Liisa, Leino-Kilpi Helena and Katajisto Jouko (2003). Nurse Empowerment, Job-Related Satisfaction, and Organizational Commitment. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 18 (3): 184-192.
Lee Cynthia, Ashford Susan J. and Bobko Philip (1990). Interactive Effects of "Type A" Behavior  and Perceived Control on Worker Performance, Job Satisfaction, and Somatic Complaints, Academy of Management Journal, 33 (4): 870-881.
Leong Siew Meng, Randall Dona M. and Cote Joseph A. (1994). Exploring the organizationalcommitment- Performance linkage in marketing: A study of life insurance salespeople. Journal of Business Research, 29 (1): 57-63.
Lok Peter and Crawford John (2001). Antecedents of organizational commitment and the mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16 (8): 594-613.
Lok Peter and Crawford John (1999). The relationship between commitment and organizational culture, subculture, leadership style and job satisfaction in organizational change and development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20 (7): 365-374.
Meyer John P. and Allen Natalie J. (1991). A Theree Compment Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment. Humen Resource Management Rewiew, 1, 61-98.
Pritchard Robert D. and Karasick Bernard W. (1973). The effects of organizational climate on managerial job performance and job satisfaction. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 9 (1): 126-146.
Riketta Michael (2002). Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: a  meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 (3): 257-266.
Sagie Abraham (1998). Employee Absenteeism, Organizational Commitment, and Job Satisfaction: Another Look. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52 (2): 156-171.
Scotter James R. Van (2000). Relationships of Task Performance and Contextual Performance with Turnover, Job Satisfaction, and Affective Commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 10 (1): 79-95.
Silverthorne Colin (2004). The impact of organizational culture and person-organization fit on organizational commitment and job satisfaction in Taiwan. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25 (7): 592-599.
Siu Oi-ling (2003). Job stress and job performance among employees in Hong Kong: The role of Chinese work values and organizational commitment. International Journal of Psychology, 38 (6): 337-347.
Somers Mark John and Birnbaum Dee (1998). Work-related commitment and job performance: it's also the nature of the performance that counts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19 (6): 621-634.
Suliman Abubakr and Iles Paul (2000). Is continuance commitment beneficial to organizations? Commitment- performance relationship: a new look. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15 (5): 407-422.
Vecchio Robert P., Justin Joseph E. and Pearce Craig L. (2008). The utility of transactional and transformational leadership for predicting performance and satisfaction within a path-goal theory framework. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 71-82.
Wech Barbara A., Mossholder Kevin W., Steel Robert P. and Bennett Nathan (1998). Does Work Group Cohesiveness Affect Individuals' Performance and Organizational Commitment? A Cross-Level Examination. Small Group Research, 29 (4): 472-494.
Williams Larry J. and Anderson Stella E. (1991). Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment as Predictors of Organizational Citizenship and In-Role Behaviors. Journal of Management, 17 (3): 601-617.
Wright Thomas A. and Bonett Douglas G. (2002). The moderating effects of employee tenure on the relation between organizational commitment and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,  87 (6): 1183-1190.
Xiong Zhen, Tsui Anne S. and Farh Lil (2002). Loyalty to supervisor vs. organizational commitment: Relationships to employee performance in China. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75 (3): 339-356.
Yazıcıoğlu İrfan (2010). Örgütlerde İş Tatmini ve İşgören Performansı İlişkisi: Türkiye ve Kazakistan Karşılaştırması. Bilig Dergisi, Güz (55): 243-264.
Yousef, Darwish A. (2000). Organizational commitment: a mediator of the relationships of leadership behavior with job satisfaction and performance in a non-western country, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15 (1): 6-24.
Yousef, Darwish A. (2002). Job satisfaction as a mediator of the relationship between role stressors and organizational commitment: A study from an Arabic cultural perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17 (4): 250-266.

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Relevant Topics

Article Usage

  • Total views: 12674
  • [From(publication date):
    September-2011 - Jul 17, 2019]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 8795
  • PDF downloads : 3879
Top