Organizational Commitment-Rewards Relationship and its Change in Japanese Companies in China

Abstract

This study investigates a transition of the relationship between rewards and the organizational commitment of total 1,005 university graduates who work for 4 Japanese companies in China. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that supervisor support had stronger influence on organizational commitment in 2013 than it did in 2007, showing that the employees became to require more support from supervisors than before due to a growing anxiety under economic slowdown since the global financial crises of 2008. This result indicates that employees may become more collectivistic during a period of economic growth stagnation. Discussions and implications concerning human resource management of Japanese companies in China are offered.

Regional Difference in the Organizational Commitment-Rewards Relationship in Vietnam

“…Our findings demonstrate that all the rewards (i.e., benefit satisfaction, fatigue, supervisor support, co-worker support, autonomy) engendered higher levels of OC. This is in line with previous research (e.g., Kokubun, 2017; and indicates there are many rewards to enhance Vietnamese OC. However, we found the two differences between Red River Delta and South East.…”

“…Recent research by Kokubun (2017; confirmed such correlations in setting of Thailand, Malaysia and China using the same questions, too. Accordingly, the researcher expects the similar association between the variables of reward and OC described below because these countries and Vietnam share similarities in geographical and cultural spheres (e.g., collectivism, high-power distance, etc.…”

“…The correspondence of these three rewards to five subdivided rewards was adopted from previous research (e.g., Kokubun, 2017). Among them, Hypothesis 1 to 2 are in line with the assertion that economic development promotes individualism (Hofstede, 2001) and that the commitment of employees with an individualist orientation may be due to the job itself or the compensation system (Boyacigiller & Adler, 1991).…”

“…The factor structure was the same for Red River Delta and South East; therefore, we are convinced that both Red River Delta and South East employees ascribed the same meanings to the scale items used in the current study (Milfont & Fischer, 2010). For reference, applying another side of the same reasoning, the researcher does not use the items "training" and "role clarity" (Kokubun, 2017; to which the parties did not ascribe the same meanings according to the result of exploratory factor analysis in this research to prevent multicollinearity with other variables.…”

“…In previous research, intrinsic rewards comprised autonomy, extrinsic rewards included benefit satisfaction and fatigue, and social rewards contained supervisor support and co-worker support (e.g., Kokubun, 2017). Porter and Lawler (1968) defined intrinsic rewards as the satisfaction that a person derives from doing the job and extrinsic rewards as tangible benefits obtained as a result of doing the job, such as pay and promotions.…”