A profile of profiles: A meta-analysis of the nomological net of commitment profiles.

Abstract

Although the majority of empirical commitment research has adopted a variable-centered approach, the person-centered or profiles approach is gaining traction. One challenge in the commitment profiles literature is that names are attached to profiles based on the within-study comparison among profiles and their relative levels and shapes. Thus, it is possible that different studies name the same profiles differently or different profiles similarly because of the context of the other profiles in the study. A meta-analytic approach, combined with multilevel latent profile analysis (LPA) that accounts for both within- and between-sample variability, is used in this study to examine the antecedents and outcomes of commitment profiles. This helps solve the naming problem by examining multiple data sets (K = 40) with a large sample (N = 16,052), obtained by contacting commitment researchers who voluntarily supplied primary data to bring further consensus about the phenomenology of profiles. LPA results revealed 5 profiles (Low, Moderate, AC-dominant, AC/NC-dominant, and High). Meta-analytic results revealed that high levels of bases of commitment were associated with value-based profiles whereas low levels were associated with weak commitment profiles. Additionally, value-based profiles were associated with older, married, and less educated participants than the weak commitment profiles. Regarding outcomes of commitment, profiles were found to significantly relate to focal behaviors (e.g., performance, tenure, and turnover) and discretionary behaviors (e.g., organizational citizenship behaviors). Value-based profiles were found to have higher levels of both focal and discretionary behaviors for all analyses. Implications for the commitment and profile literature are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

The future of workplace commitment: key questions and directions

“…It also tends to be less demanding with respect to interpretation and statistical power compared to modelling higher-way interactions between multiple commitments in a variable-centred (e.g., regression) approach Morin, 2016;Van Rossenberg, 2015). This approach has been applied to explore profiles of the TCM mindsets (e.g., Kabins, Xu, Bergman, Berry, & Willson, 2016;Meyer et al, 2012), and, profiles of commitments to multiple targets (e.g., Meyer, Morin, & Vandenberghe, 2015;Morin, Meyer, McInerney, Marsh, & Ganotice, 2015;Morin et al, 2011).…”

Employee commitment before and after an economic crisis: A stringent test of profile similarity

“…This requires a program of research to document the construct validity of the profiles, including evidence of consistency in (a) the profiles that emerge across samples and conditions, and (b) the ways these profiles relate to other theoryrelevant variables (see Marsh, Lüdtke, Trautwein, & Morin, 2009;Morin et al, 2011). Such consistency is beginning to emerge across studies (Kabins et al, 2016;, across subsamples from the same population (Meyer, Kam, Goldenberg & Bremner, 2013), and within samples over time (Kam, Morin, Meyer, & Topolnytsky, 2016). In one of the most stringent tests of consistency to date, Kam et al (2016) found that the same profiles emerged prior to and during an organizational change.…”

Taking a person-centered approach to personality: A latent-profile analysis of the HEXACO model of personality

“…Still other profiles might be unique to our sample of students, and studies with other populations might identify profiles not found in our study. This combination of common and unique profiles across populations/samples has been observed in other domains (e.g., organizational commitment: see Kabins, Xu, Bergman, Berry, & Willson, 2016;. Identifying the full set of meaningful configurations of HEXACO profiles might require analyses with a very large and diverse sample (cf.…”

“…Identifying the full set of meaningful configurations of HEXACO profiles might require analyses with a very large and diverse sample (cf. Herzberg & Roth, 2006;Kabins et al, 2016). This would then allow for comparison of profiles obtained with samples drawn from more unique populations.…”