Further assessments of Meyer and Allen's (1991) three-component model of organizational commitment.

Abstract

The construct validity of J. P. Meyer and N. J. Allen's (1991) 3-component model of organizational commitment was assessed. Despite the large error components associated with some of the items from Meyer and Allen's scales, the existence of 3 facets of commitment (affective, continuance, and normative) was generally supported by a confirmatory factor analysis of data from 2,301 nurses. Moreover, some of the expected differential relationships of these facets to antecedents and outcomes of commitment were observed in both the nurse sample and a sample comprising 80 bus operators. However, the facets generally did not relate strongly or differentially to a set of rating and nonrating measures of job performance.Organizational commitment is of interest to both behavioral scientists and practicing managers (cf. Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982). Although most practitioners are inclined to associate high commitment with increased productivity and lower turnover, organizational scientists strive to understand the facets of commitment and their differential relationships to both antecedents and work outcomes (cf.

Effects of Individual Risk Attitude, Safety Climate, and Affective Commitment on Safety Compliance

“…ISSN 2162-4860 2015 variables that are potential antecedents, correlates, or consequences of commitment. As a general result, these studies have documented a high predictive power of commitment regarding turnover decisions, absenteeism, job satisfaction, and job performance (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990;Meyer & Allen, 1991;Meyer et al, 1993;Hackett et al, 1994;Meyer et al, 2002), and many of them have provided empirical support to the three-component specification of organizational commitment (Meyer et al, 1993;Hackett et al, 1994;Meyer et al, 2002). A robust result concerning the predictive power of the three components that has been pointed out by Meyer & Herscovitch (2001) and confirmed by the meta-analysis of Meyer et al (2002) is that "compared to continuance and normative commitment, affective commitment (a) correlates significantly with a wider range of "outcome" measures and (b) correlates most strongly with any given outcome measure" (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001, p. 311).…”

“…Among the various definitions present in the literature, Meyer & Allen (1991) provided a successful three-component characterization of organizational commitment that has been extensively tested and refined (Meyer, Allen & Smith, 1993;Hackett, Bycio & Hausdorf, 1994). According to this approach, commitment can be defined as a general force that binds an individual to the organization but that has a complex and multifaceted structure consisting of three components (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001).…”

The Effect of Internal Marketing on Organizational Commitment in Iranian Banks

“…Normative commitment reflects a feeling of obligation to the company. Strong commitment in this situation is where employees feel they ought to remain with the company based on a sense of duty, loyalty or moral obligation [21] . Meyer et al found that affective, normative and continuance commitments were distinguishable, but affective and normative commitments appear to be related [22] .…”

The dimensionality of professional commitment

“…The multidimensionality of organisational commitment is now wellestablished Meyer, Allen, & Gellatly, 1990;Dunham, Grube, & Castañeda, 1994;Hackett, Bycio, & Hausdorf, 1994;McGee & Ford, 1987;Meyer, Allen, & Smith, 1993;Reilly & Orsak, 1991;Shore & Tetrick, 1991). Meyer, et al (1993) believed that, just as organisational commitment was best explained by three distinct component measures; professional commitment should similarly be explained by three distinct component measures.…”