Exploring the Role of Social Networks in Affective Organizational Commitment: Network Centrality, Strength of Ties, and Structural Holes

Abstract

Although studies in public management have identified personal attributes, job characteristics, and organizational rewards as key factors that influence affective organizational commitment, limited attention has been paid to the influence of social networks on affective commitment. Given that organizational attitudes and behaviors are often socially constructed, this article argues that employees’ affective commitment is influenced by their social networks in an organization. What are the social network configurations that lead to affective organizational commitment? This study attempts to answer this question by focusing on nonlinear relationships between several network dimensions (i.e., network centrality, tie strength, and structural holes) and affective commitment. These relationships are empirically tested by using both social network data and employee survey data collected from two local governments in South Korea. Results of the study show that employees’ network centrality has an inverted U-shaped relationship with affective commitment and structural holes have a U-shaped association with affective commitment, controlling for certain organizational rewards and individual attributes. However, the relationship between a tie strength and affective commitment is not statistically significant. The practical and theoretical implications of the study findings are discussed.

The model of HRM-trust-commitment relationships

“…Research has shown that the key factors shaping commitment are: superior coaching, properly provided feedback, the type of control and social support felt by the employee (Bakker, Demerouti, 2008;Halbesleben, 2010). Research conducted by different authors in public sector organisations has confirmed a positive relationship between HRM practices, including career opportunities, participation in training programmes and promotion prospects, and affective commitment (Kooij, et al, 2010;Lee, Kim, 2011).…”

Network performance assessment for collaborative disaster response

“…It is used both as a metaphor to describe and explain intergovernmental, cross-sector, interorganizational relationships (Koliba et al, 2010) and as methodological tools to examine relational data (Choi and Kim, 2007;Kapucu and Demiroz, 2011;Lee and Kim, 2011). Networks have been applied in many areas and different contexts (Jasny, 2012;Lee et al, 2012;Provan and Huang, 2012;Schalk et al, 2010).…”

Structure and Network Performance

“…The article utilizes the network approach for analysis and evaluation purposes. Network analysis has been 10 Administration & Society suggested as a useful tool to examine the structural and relational aspects of networks (Kapucu, 2006a;J. Lee & Kim, 2011;Milward & Provan, 1998).…”