The Mediating Role of Job Involvement Between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment in a Small and Medium Sized Business Enterprise

Abstract

The level of competition among companies nowadays have intensified even further. Companies compete not only with domestic entities but with international and global companies as well. In view of this, there is this never-ending pursuit of that competitive advantage a company can utilize to stay at least a step ahead of competition. Many others have looked at developing superior and more technologically advanced products while other have looked in improving their services. But no matter what strategy a company employs, there will always be a need for them to have good people. Good, motivated, satisfied, involved and committed people. Without this, nothing can ever be accomplished. The main purpose of this study was to examine the relationship among these motivation management variables-job satisfaction, job involvement and organizational commitment. Furthermore, this study would like to find out if job involvement can be a mediating variable between job satisfaction and organizational commitment.Respondents in this study were employees of a small and medium sized business enterprise engaged in the manufacturing of processed meat products. Data collection was done using online questionnaire in combination with face to face interview. Findings indicated that job satisfaction can be good predictor of organizational commitment and job involvement among employees of a small and medium-sized business entity here in the Philippines. Job involvement also significantly mediated the impact of job satisfaction on employee organizational commitment. Results of this study can be used as a reinforcement as to how important job satisfaction is with regards employee motivation management. Job satisfaction among employees may also contribute in making sure that they become committed to the organization as well as involved with their jobs. Furthermore, results of this study can also be used by scholars in further probing the various control variables that may be used in further enhancing and improving the current model at hand.

The Relationship of Arrogance Leadership, Job Commitment,and Job Satisfaction in Higher Educational Organisations in Sarawak

“…Without a doubt, this was consistent with the definition of continuance commitment whereby it was looking at the perceived cost (both economically and socially) or risk the employees needed to bear to leave the organisation (Allen & Meyer, 1993;Meyer et al, 1989). However, choosing to remain and stay committed did not mean that employees strived to perform better or ever be satisfied with the organisation (Mendoza, 2019). Based on the findings, the overall continuance commitment was high (M = 4.35, SD = .767).…”

“…In relation, it was also found that there is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment with leadership style among university lecturers (Hazriyanto & Ibrahim, 2019;Tatlah, Akhtar, & Hashmi, 2019). Also, it seems that when given autonomy, teachers or employees tend to have higher satisfaction and commitment level (Mendoza, 2019;Saba, 2011;Tatlah et al, 2019).…”

“…Other work-related behaviours such as arrogance leadership can cause employees to be reluctant and resistant to work at full capacity (Allen & Meyer, 1993). Mendoza (2019) affirmed that for employees to be committed or have a higher level of job commitment, they must be able to identify with the organizations that they are working for and must be fully engaged or feel engaged in the daily operations. In other words, commitment is believed to be a desirable quality to inculcate amongst employees for an organization to strive successfully as well as maintaining economies of scales.…”

“…As compared to affective commitment, this means that they solely choose to remain because they need to and not because they want to. Although choosing to remain and stay committed, employees might not strive to perform better or ever be satisfied with the organisation (Mendoza, 2019).…”

“…Based on the findings, the overall continuance commitment was high (M = 4.35, SD = .767). A person can be loyal but not committed, as they perceived that there was lack of opportunities outside their current organisations and if the costs to bear for leaving would be too high or unbearable (Allen & Meyer, 1993;Mendoza, 2019). This meant that they solely chose to remain because they needed to and not because they wanted to.…”