1
Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
Chapter 6: Organizational Commitment: Complication or Clarification?
S. Arzu Wasti
Sabanci University
Faculty of Management
Orhanli 34956 Tuzla
Istanbul, Turkey
Phone: +90 216 4839662
Fax +90 216 483 9699
E-mail: awasti@sabanciuniv.edu
2
Dating back to the 1960s, organizational commitment (OC) has become an important
topic for organizational research due to its association with employee performance, prosocial
behaviors, absenteeism and turnover (Meyer & Allen, 1997). While much of this literature
has been primarily relevant to the North American context, there is now an accumulation of
more than three decades’ of cross-cultural research. The early stream of research was spurred
largely by a concern to explore whether the widening productivity gap between Japan and the
United States (US) in the late 1970s might be due to differences in employees’ OC as
reflected in their respective turnover rates. In addition to comparing the conceptualization of
OC (e.g., Marsh & Mannari, 1977) and mean differences in its level (e.g., Luthans, McCaul,
& Dodd, 1985), researchers sought to discern whether structural versus cultural factors had a
greater influence in generating employee commitment (Lincoln & Kalleberg, 1985; Near,
1985). While suggesting that some determinants of commitment are universal, the results
were counterintuitive as they reported lower levels of commitment among the Japanese.
Redding, Norman and Schlander (1994) argued that this inconsistency might have been due
to methodological problems like the response bias that stems from Japanese reticence in
asserting personal claims. More importantly, they noted that such studies made an undue
assumption that the two essential components –commitment and organization – meant the
same across cultures and researchers thus possibly ended up comparing different phenomena.
In a broader review, Randall (1993) further concluded that due to the limited number of
studies reporting comparable data, the wide reliance on different instruments for measuring
commitment, the different nature of samples across countries as well as an insufficient focus
on why and how culture would matter, it was very difficult to compare the nature,
development and consequences of commitment across contexts.
This chapter takes up from where Randall (1993) left off and critically evaluates the
cross-cultural OC literature of the last decade. The term cross-cultural in this review refers to
3
comparative studies as well as to single-nation studies conducted outside the mainstream,
where mainstream is defined as research from North America as well as those nations that
have high representation in top US journals (Kirkman & Law, 2005). The chapter is
organized as follows: In the first section, studies investigating the dimensions of OC are
presented. Next, research on the antecedents and outcomes of OC is reviewed. A summary of
the studies reviewed is provided in Table 1. Finally, future research directions are discussed.
- Table 1 about here Dimensions of OC
The early mainstream conceptualizations of OC were unidimensional, defining it
either as a consistent line of activity due to a recognition of costs associated with quitting
(Becker, 1960) or more popularly, as an emotional attachment (Mowday, Steers, & Porter,
1979). In the 1980s and early 1990s, several alternative models of commitment, all of which
were multidimensional, were developed (e.g., Allen & Meyer, 1990; O’Reilly & Chatman,
1986). Of these, the three-component model by Meyer and Allen (1991) has gained
substantial popularity. According to this model, employees with strong affective commitment
(AC) remain in the organization because they want to, those with strong continuance
commitment (CC) because they need to, those with strong normative commitment (NC)
because they feel they ought to do so. As such, the three components are hypothesized to
develop from different antecedents and to have different implications for job outcomes other
than turnover.
The three-component model has received considerable empirical support in the North
American context (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch & Topolnytsky, 2002). Studies from Western
Europe, Australia or New Zealand also confirm its validity (e.g., Iverson & Buttigieg, 1999).
For instance, using two French-speaking Belgian samples, Stinglhamber, Bentein and
Vandenberghe (2002) found strong support for the model within and across several foci,
4
namely the organization, the occupation, the supervisor, the work group, and customers.
Vandenberghe, Stinglhamber, Bentein and Delhaise (2001) further investigated the validity of
this model across employees from 15 European nations, all of whom worked for the
European Commission. While for CC and NC, the organizational and occupational foci were
indistinguishable empirically, measurement properties were culturally robust and the
relationships between commitment components and turnover intentions were consistent
across the Western European employees in this study. Additionally, employees from more
individualistic European nations displayed higher levels of CC to their organization and
occupation, and employees from countries high on masculinity exhibited stronger levels of
AC to being a European.
Findings from contexts considerably different than North America have been more
mixed. For instance, in contrast to Chen and Francesco (2003), Cheng and Stockdale (2003)’s
data from Chinese employees revealed only a modest fit for Meyer and Allen’s (1991) model.
Nevertheless, the antecedents of the three dimensions were associated most strongly with
their respective scales. Furthermore, AC and NC significantly predicted job satisfaction and
all three components predicted turnover intention, although associations between CC and
these outcomes were moderated by NC. This effect was attributed to the primacy of norms
concerning organizational attachment in the Chinese national culture. NC and AC were
significantly higher and CC was significantly lower in the Chinese sample than in samples
from Canada and South Korea (hereafter referred to as Korea).
Gautam, van Dick and Wagner (2001) explored the dimensionality of Meyer and
Allen’s (1991) model in Nepalese organizations. Interestingly, no demographic or
organizational variable was associated with AC. Older employees, those in lower-level
positions, and those who perceived their jobs to be more interesting and challenging had
higher levels of CC. Those with higher numbers of dependent family members, those with a
5
perception of a more interesting job, and those who perceived more support from their
leaders showed more NC. Regarding job search and turnover intentions, only AC was
significant.
Ko, Price and Mueller (1997) tested Meyer and Allen’s (1991) model in Korea. The
three scales had acceptable reliability and convergent validity, but the AC and the NC scales
lacked discriminant validity and the construct validity of NC and CC were questionable.
Likewise, Lee, Allen, Meyer and Rhee (2001) used back-translated versions of Meyer, Allen,
and Smith’s (1993) scales in Korea and obtained results similar to Ko et al. (1997). To
investigate whether this was due to culturally irrelevant items, Lee et al. (2001) pilot tested a
new set of items written by an international team (Meyer, Barak & Vandenberghe, 1996).
The authors reran the validity analyses and found support for the three-component model.
Similarly, Wasti (2003a) adapted Meyer et al.’s (1993) scales by adding emic (culturespecific) items that she developed through interviews with Turkish employees and validated
the three-factor conceptualization.
In addition to testing the validity of North American models, indigenous approaches
have been emerging. For example, Wang (2004) cited two Japanese studies which refer to
four dimensions of commitment (Takao, 1998; Tao, 1997): affective emotional, value
rational, normative and continuance. Wang (2004) also drew on the work of Ling, Zhang and
Fang (2001) in Chinese, who proposed a five-factor model including AC, NC, ideal
commitment (which reflects communist ideals, arguably corresponding largely to CC),
economic commitment and opportunity commitment. They further made a distinction
between active CC, associated with an awareness of an opportunity to improve oneself by onthe-job training or promotion, and passive CC, which suggests that employees have to remain
due to lack of alternatives. Using Chinese respondents, Wang (2004) empirically confirmed a
five-factor model, distinguishing AC, NC, active CC, passive CC and value commitment,
6
which refers to an employee’s feelings of value congruence with their organization. It should
be noted however, that value commitment and active CC as defined above are typically
considered antecedents of AC in the mainstream research.
Thus, there is substantial evidence in favor of a three dimensional structure of OC.
Taken together with Stanley, Meyer, Jackson et al.’s (2007) meta-analytic findings which
indicate that the three components are distinguishable across cultures, future investigations
can contribute by refining the operationalization of the components, particularly CC and NC.
To this end, it is strongly recommended that researchers develop decentered scales, i.e., ones
that are composed of items that are applicable both in meaning and choice of expression to
many national cultures (van de Vijver & Leung, 1997). Regarding NC, for instance, the
rewording of items that refer to “feelings” to reflect obligations (Bergman, 2006), or the
adding of items that explicitly tap the perceived appropriateness of commitment for the
employee’s specific reference groups may improve the construct’s cross-cultural validity.
Such undertakings, however, will require the involvement of international collaborators at
stages prior to data collection, as well as multi-method designs that incorporate quantitative
as well as qualitative tools.
Antecedents of OC
While in the mainstream literature there are literally hundreds of studies on the
antecedents of OC (especially AC), the meta-analysis by Meyer et al. (2002) indicates that
AC develops primarily from positive work-related experiences, in particular higher levels of
job scope (e.g., autonomy) and perceived organizational support and justice. CC, in contrast,
develops from perceived lack of job alternatives and costs associated with leaving. Although
there is insufficient empirical evidence to substantiate the claim, NC is theorized to develop
by early socialization experiences from family or culture and on the basis of an employee’s
psychological contract regarding reciprocal obligations. Interested readers are referred to
7
Meyer and Allen (1997) for the theoretical bases of these antecedents (see also the discussion
of psychological contracts by Schalk & Soeters, Chapter 7).
The cross-national generality of these antecedents has been the concern of much
research. Three themes dominate this literature: Firstly, researchers have investigated the
influence of cultural differences, mostly collectivism and power distance, on the salience of
various work-related antecedents, especially those characterized to be more relational or
hierarchical, such as leadership and voice. Secondly, studies have explored whether workers
from different institutional systems (e.g., former communist countries) are similarly
motivated by the antecedents identified in the mainstream literature. Finally, researchers have
focused on individual differences. In the next section, studies falling under the first two of
these themes are presented as a series of work-related antecedents, followed by a section on
the third theme, namely individual-related antecedents.
Work-related Antecedents
Justice. Organizational fairness has been most popular in terms of work-related
antecedents. For example, Rahim, Magner, Antonioni and Rahman (2001) examined the
relationships between distributive, procedural and interactional justice and AC with faculty
members and managers from the US and Bangladesh. Distributive justice did not predict AC
across the board, whereas procedural justice was significant in all samples except the
Bangladeshi managers (for whom only interactional justice was significant). These authors
concluded that culture had little influence on justice-commitment relations.
However, studies which have included culturally salient variables or explicitly
measured cultural values suggest otherwise. For instance, Ohbuchi, Suzuki and Hayashi
(2001) found that for Japanese employees, attainment of group goals and not individual goals
increased perceptions of justice, which in turn was associated with OC. In two experimental
studies, Brockner, Ackerman, Greenberg et al. (2001) showed that the tendency for people to
8
respond with lower AC to lower levels of voice was greater in a low power distance national
culture (US) than in high power distance national cultures (China and Mexico). In a survey
study with Chinese employees, they also found that the predicted interaction between voice
and power distance emerged for a host of dependent variables, including AC. More recently,
Fischer and Smith (2006), using data from (former East) German and British employees and
drawing on Schwartz’s (1992) values framework, showed that openness to change moderated
the relationship between procedural justice perceptions and AC such that the relationship was
stronger for individuals who endorsed openness to change values to a greater extent.
Furthermore, the three-way interactions between values, justice perceptions and national
culture were significant suggesting that the strength of the moderation was related to the
salience of the values within a society. These latter two studies are notable as the cultural
values hypothesized to influence the justice-commitment relationship were measured, thereby
providing stronger evidence as to the influence of culture (see also Fischer, Chapter 8).
Going back East and drawing on the concept of collectivism, Kickul, Lester and
Belgio (2004) tested the differences between the psychological contracts operating in the US
and in Hong Kong. Because of the financial pressure that utilitarian familism places on Hong
Kong employees, the authors hypothesized that the Hong Kong Chinese would react more
negatively (lower levels of job satisfaction, AC, NC, CC and organizational citizenship
behaviors (OCBs)) to breaches of the extrinsic components of the psychological contract. US
workers, who derive more of their self-worth from their career, were expected to react more
negatively to breaches of the intrinsic components. Their results largely confirmed their
expectations.
Organizational Support and Leadership. Yoon and Thye (2002) argued that perceived
organizational support (a relational construct) would be a better predictor of AC than job
satisfaction (an individual emotion) in Korea but they found that both variables were equally
9
potent in predicting commitment. Comparing US and Singaporean nurses, Lee and Bruvold
(2003) found that perceived investment in employee development predicted AC, but was
unrelated to CC in both countries. AC was negatively related to turnover intention only in
Singapore, but CC did not predict turnover intentions in either sample. These authors argued
that investing in employees contributes to a desirable form of employee commitment across
both Eastern and Western settings, a conclusion corroborated with Indian (Agarwala, 2003)
as well as Korean (Chang, 1999) data.
These conclusions can be more thoroughly tested by studies that have included
individual-level measures of individualism-collectivism, also referred to as idiocentrismallocentrism. In three emerging economies, namely China, India and Kenya, Walumbwa and
Lawler (2003), measuring collectivism at the individual level, carried out a sub-group
comparison and showed that transformational leadership was more strongly related to
satisfaction with coworkers and AC in the high collectivist group compared to the low
collectivist group. In a related vein, Wasti (2003b) showed that while satisfaction with work
was a significant antecedent of AC and NC both for allocentrics and idiocentrics in a Turkish
sample, satisfaction with supervisor was significant only for allocentrics, also with respect to
CC. A further study by Walumbwa, Orwa, Wang and Lawler (2005) revealed that
transformational leadership predicted AC in Kenyan and US samples. Walumbwa, Lawler,
Avolio, Wang and Shi (2005) also found that both collective- and self-efficacy moderated the
relationship between transformational leadership and AC and job satisfaction across their
Chinese, Indian and American samples. The three-way interactions were insignificant,
suggesting country had little influence once the effects of the efficacy measures had been
taken into account.
In another study from Kenya, Mulinge (2001) showed that agricultural technicians
who were able to transmit information upwards, who had sufficient organizational resources,
10
high job security, vertical occupational mobility, task significance, co-worker support and
firm-specific training, low job repetition and low role ambiguity were more satisfied with
their jobs. Job satisfaction, in turn, was the strongest predictor of OC. In addition, higher
levels of supervisor support, task significance, legitimate promotion standards, lower levels
of role ambiguity as well as gender, tenure, sector and kinship responsibilities directly
predicted commitment. This study as well as those by Walumbwa and his colleagues are
valuable particularly because research from Africa, with the relative exception of South
Africa, is very limited. Furthermore, Gbadamosi (2003) argues that while Western
management concepts dominate the thinking of academics and managers in Africa, such
practices are not widely applicable and despite years of colonization African managers have
indigenous practices that are under-investigated (see Smith, Chapter 19).
Teamwork. Teamwork has also been explored in relation to commitment. For
instance, Kirkman and Shapiro (2001) examined whether employee resistance to teams and to
self-management mediated the relationships between cultural values and OC. Specifically,
they argued that an individual-level measure of collectivism would be negatively related to
resistance to teams. They also proposed that power distance and determinism (fatalism)
would be positively, but doing-orientation (the extent to which people have a strong work
ethic) would be negatively related to resistance to self-management. Higher resistance in turn
would lead to lower levels of AC. Their data from self-managing work teams in Belgium,
Finland, Philippines and the US largely confirmed their hypotheses but showed that country
remained a significant predictor of outcomes even after these cultural values had been entered
into the equation (See also Halevy & Sagiv, Chapter 15).
Institutional effects. Drawing not on cultural but on institutional differences, Pearce,
Branyiczki and Bigley (2000) argued that neo-traditional political systems, prevalent in excommunist or economically developing countries, are conducive to the emergence of
11
particularistic organizations, where power holders typically hire or fire on the basis of
employees’ personal characteristics (e.g., relatives, personal loyalties). The authors proposed
that in particularistic organizations, employees are more likely to trust the ingroup and
unlikely to be committed to the organization. In similar vein, Pearce, Bigley and Branyiczki
(1998) further argued that employees in all systems would value merit-based organizations
and that perceptions of procedural justice would predict greater AC and trust even after
controlling for political economy. Their studies comparing the US with Lithuania (Pearce et
al., 1998) and Hungary (Pearce et al., 2000) supported their predictions.
Indeed, institutional transitions and their implications have been the main impetus
behind the growing literature from Eastern Europe and from China. For example, Gallie,
Kostova and Kuchar (1999) compared AC across the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria and
the UK. Although the authors did not report taking response biases into account, they noted
that AC was highest in the UK, followed by Bulgaria, the society closest to state socialist
forms of work organization. AC was lowest in the Czech Republic, which suggested that the
sharpest alienation from the organization appeared to be a function of the mismatch between
heightened aspirations and continuing past practices. The authors’ descriptive comparison of
the antecedents suggested that the British employees not only experienced a stronger sense of
initiative and responsibility, but also endorsed higher levels of satisfaction with their
supervisors, colleagues, pay, promotion opportunities and job security. Across the four
countries, satisfaction with work hours and task effort were unrelated to AC, but satisfaction
with task initiative, communication with management, work efficiency and promotion
opportunities were significant predictors. There were no consistent findings with respect to
satisfaction with task variety, colleagues, participation, pay, and job security. In another
study, Roe, Zinovieva, Dienes and Horn (2000) studied the antecedents and outcomes of job
involvement and AC of workers in Bulgaria, Hungary and the Netherlands. While career
12
opportunities appeared to be a common determinant of AC, pay was a predictor only for the
former communist countries. Growth, belongingness needs and organizational climate were
significant for Hungarian and Dutch workers but not for Bulgarians, for whom esteem needs
were salient. Nevertheless, across the three samples AC was a significant predictor of job
satisfaction, effort and turnover intentions. In sum, while the evidence from Eastern Europe
does not clearly delineate the effects of cultural, economic or political factors, merit-based
systems, do broadly speaking, emerge as a generalizable antecedent of AC.
Regarding China, considerable research has explored the transition experienced by
state-owned enterprises (SOEs), which are increasingly adopting Western HRM procedures
to enhance competitiveness. Thus far, the findings have been inconsistent. In one study,
Wang (2004) found that SOEs had higher levels of passive CC and lower levels of value
commitment than foreign-invested enterprises (FIEs). Surprisingly, SOEs also enjoyed higher
levels of active CC, and FIE ownership did not predict AC or NC. Chiu (2003), in his
comparison of SOEs, FIEs and private enterprises, found that AC was predicted by perceived
organizational prospects and operational effectiveness after the impact of organizational
ownership and demographic characteristics were controlled. Organizational ownership was
unrelated to workers’ AC but predicted CC. Specifically SOE workers felt a stronger sense of
reliance on the organization than workers in private enterprises. In contrast, Yu and Egri
(2005) found that FIE employees were more satisfied with their HRM practices and
consequently more affectively committed than SOE employees. According to Wang (2004),
currently neither SOEs nor FIEs invest highly in their employees, and even when FIEs do
invest, better opportunities are offered to only a small portion of employees whereas in SOEs
the inferior opportunities are available to more employees. Wang’s (2004) observations may
explain these unexpected and conflicting findings.
13
Institutional differences have also triggered research in West European countries.
Arguing that Scandinavian countries differ in their institutionalized commitment to paid labor
and employment, Svallfors, Halvorsen and Andersen (2001) investigated OC in Denmark,
Norway and Sweden. Using data from the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP,
1997), the authors found that Denmark had the highest and Sweden the lowest levels of
commitment, which opposed their expectations. They speculated that because Danish
workplaces are smaller, they are also less hierarchical and more rewarding regarding work
content. Along the same lines, Hult (2005) predicted divergence between the coordinated
market economies of Sweden, Germany and Norway versus the liberal market economies of
the US, New Zealand and the UK. Although the ISSP (1997) data indicated unexpected
differences in mean levels (with Sweden lowest and the US highest on AC), there were no
differences in the extent to which intrinsic, extrinsic or social work values were satisfied.
However, there is no indication that response biases were taken into account. Of note, in all
countries, interesting work showed the strongest correlation with AC.
Another research focus in West European countries has been labor market changes.
For example, Chirumbolo and Hellgren (2003) found that perceived job insecurity was
negatively related to AC across Belgian, Italian and Dutch samples, but not in a Swedish
sample. Furthermore, in the Belgian, Dutch and Italian samples, AC partially mediated the
influence of job insecurity on mental health complaints, and in the Belgian and Dutch
samples it fully mediated the influence of job insecurity on turnover intentions. Using the
same dataset, De Witte and Naswall (2003) showed that temporary employment did not
directly affect AC in any of the countries except Italy, but was associated with lower
perceived job security, which in turn predicted lower AC. In Sweden and Belgium, job
insecurity predicted lower AC only among permanent employees, suggesting that job
insecurity might be perceived as a violation of their psychological contract. The authors
14
speculated that this result might have occurred in these two countries due to the existence of
stronger unions.
Individual-Related Antecedents
While most studies have incorporated demographic variables as control variables,
some have explicitly investigated their relation to OC in different environments. In the
Chinese context, Chen and Francesco (2000) argued that employees with good guanxi would
be promoted to higher positions and hypothesized that position would be associated with
higher AC. Since guanxi would not necessarily be related to age or tenure, they did not
expect these variables to be significant. Indeed, only position (operationalized as hierarchical
level) positively influenced employees’ AC. In Jordan, Al-Qarioti and Al-Enezi (2004) found
no mean level differences in AC among middle managers in nongovernmental, public and
private organizations. In contrast to Western evidence, education, age and marriage were all
negatively related to AC. Noting the high unemployment rate in the country, the authors
argued that young employees who were lucky enough to find a job were likely to feel more
committed. In their comparative study in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, Svallfors et al.
(2001) found gender, the presence of children and marriage/cohabitation all had no effect on
OC. As predicted, OC increased with age, seniority, higher education and self-employment.
In sum, while demographic variables appear to have differential relations with OC across
contexts, the variation seems to be a function of macro-economic factors.
Another antecedent that has received some interest is cultural values measured at
the individual level. The findings do not yield a clear picture; however, there is some
consistency with respect to collectivism and uncertainty avoidance as predictors of OC. For
instance, Robertson, Al-Khatib and Al-Habib (2002) surveyed employees in Saudi Arabia,
Oman and Kuwait and found collectivism, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity all related
to higher OC beliefs. Similarly, Parkes, Bochner and Schneider’s (2001) results from two
15
matched organizations in Australia and South-East Asia indicated that both individual-level
individualism-collectivism and national culture independently explained AC. Furthermore,
there was a significant interaction between national and individual-level cultural values.
Specifically, collectivists were more committed than individualists in the Asian organizations
but not in the Australian organizations. In a more elaborate study using a US sample and
measuring commitment to organization, supervisor and workgroup, Clugston, Howell and
Dorfman (2000) showed that power distance was positively related to NC and CC; and
uncertainty avoidance was positively related to CC across all foci. Collectivism was
positively related to workgroup commitment across all commitment dimensions as well as to
NC to the organization and supervisor.
Drawing on Schwartz’s (1992) framework, Glazer, Daniel and Short (2004) proposed
that self-transcendence and conservation values would be positively related to AC,
particularly in more communal societies like Hungary and Italy than in more contractual
cultures, such as the UK and US. They further proposed that openness to change values
would be negatively related to AC, and self-enhancement values would be associated with
higher levels of CC, especially in contractual cultures. Using data from nurses, the authors
found that the samples did not differ along the value dimensions, suggesting that the
occupational culture might be more dominant than the national culture. Conservation values
had positive and self-enhancement values had negative relations with AC in Hungary and
Italy but not in the UK or the US. Noting that value dimensions explained OC to a greater
extent in the Hungarian and the Italian samples, the authors speculated that values might be a
stronger predictor of commitment in communal cultures than in contractual cultures, where
experiences at work might be better predictors.
Finally, a few studies have investigated various other individual differences as
antecedents to OC. For example, Jamal (2005) found that job stress was negatively correlated
16
with OC both for Chinese and Canadian employees whereas Type A personality, time
pressure and competitiveness were significant only in the Canadian sample. In another study,
Luthans, Zhu and Avolio (2006) showed that general self-efficacy had a positive relationship
with AC and a negative relationship with turnover intentions across employees from the US
and Southeast Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand combined).
Outcomes of OC
The relation between OC and employee retention, particularly in terms of withdrawal
cognitions is well-established in the mainstream literature (Meyer et al., 2002). The modest
association of commitment with in-role performance has been attributed to the moderation of
external factors such as access to resources or ability (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Indeed, OC
appears to predict extra-role behaviors better, arguably due to fewer situational constraints.
Meta-analysis of North American research further suggests that AC has the strongest
association with desirable job outcomes, followed by NC while CC is typically either
unrelated or negatively related to positive outcomes (Meyer et al., 2002). This conclusion has
been challenged by cross-cultural researchers who have explored whether NC is a stronger
predictor of job outcomes in more collectivist nations. Evidence on this quest is presented
below.
Turnover and Turnover Intentions
Stanley et al.’s (2007) meta-analysis on the cross-cultural generalizability of Meyer
and Allen’s (1991) model indicated that turnover cognition correlated negatively with AC
(= -.55; K= 176), with NC (= -.42; K = 70) and with CC ( = -.25; K = 92). The
values represent true correlations estimated by computing the average of correlations
corrected for sampling error and unreliability; K denotes the number of studies in the
analysis. They further found that the strong negative correlation between AC and turnover
cognition was consistent across nations. In contrast, nation-level values and practices as
17
measured by the GLOBE project (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004)
accounted for a substantial portion of the cross-study variability in correlations involving CC
and NC. The correlation between NC and turnover cognition varied from a low of -.34 in the
Anglo cluster of nations to a high of -.67 in the Middle East cluster, and the correlation
between CC and turnover cognition varied from a low of -.21 in the Anglo cluster to a high of
-.55 in Confucian Asia.
The moderation effects that were found were identical for NC and for CC. As
expected, the correlation between commitment and turnover cognition was moderated by
ingroup collectivism (both values and practices), institutional collectivism (practices) and
power distance (practices). The relation between these variables was more negative in nations
with strong institutional collectivism values as well as strong ingroup collectivism and power
distance practices. However, the relation was less negative in cultures with strong ingroup
collectivism values. In addition, the correlation between commitment and turnover cognition
was less negative in nations with strong gender egalitarian values and practices, strong
performance orientation values, and strong future orientation values.
There has been much less research on actual turnover behavior. In one study, Yao and
Wang (2006) argued that idiocentrism would moderate the relationship between AC and job
satisfaction, and allocentrism would moderate the relationship between NC and turnover
frequency, measured as the number of companies previously worked for. NC was
operationalized as a general norm favoring loyalty and in fact, might be viewed as an
antecedent to NC (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Nevertheless, AC was positively related to job
satisfaction and generalized norms for loyalty predicted low turnover for Chinese employees.
Further, where norms were stronger, turnover frequency of individuals higher in allocentrism
decreased more strongly. These results are in line with Wasti’s (2003a) study in Turkey,
18
which showed that the relationship between NC and turnover intentions was stronger for
allocentrics but weaker for idiocentrics.
Some studies have also investigated the relation between commitment to other foci
and turnover. For example, Stinglhamber et al. (2002) showed that although OC remained the
primary explanation of turnover intentions, commitment to the occupation, supervisor,
workgroup, and customers also contributed unique variance. In a longitudinal multi-study
investigation, Vandenberghe, Bentein and Stinglhamber (2004) found that AC had an indirect
effect on turnover through intent to quit, partially mediated the effect of affective supervisor
commitment on intent to quit and completely mediated the effect of affective workgroup
commitment on intent to quit.
In-role and Extra-role Performance (OCB)
Studies on OC outcomes other than turnover have almost all focused on
organizational citizenship behavior (see also Farh, Hackett & Chen, Chapter 10). These
studies have typically emerged from Asia. For example, Gautam, van Dick, Wagner,
Upadhay and Davis (2005) explored the relationship between OC and OCBs in a Nepalese
sample. AC and NC correlated significantly with both the altruism and compliance
dimensions of OCB, while CC was unrelated to altruism and negatively associated with
compliance. NC was more strongly related to the two OCB indicators as might be expected
from Nepalese employees, characterized as endorsing high levels of collectivism and power
distance. In another study, Chen and Francesco (2003) showed that AC related positively to
both in-role and extra-role performance, while CC was not associated with in-role
performance but negatively correlated with extra-role performance among Chinese
employees. In addition, NC moderated the relationship between AC and in-role as well as
extra-role performance. For those employees who were committed to the organization
because they felt an obligation, emotional attachment was not related to performance
19
outcomes. With the same data, Francesco and Chen (2004) further showed that there was a
weaker positive relationship between commitment and performance among those endorsing
an individual-level measure of collectivism to a higher extent. The authors argued that as
collectivists were strongly motivated by group norms, a collectivist’s personal commitment to
or liking for the organization had less relationship to performance.
In a study comparing Arab and Jewish teachers in Israel, Cohen (2006) failed to find a
moderating effect of collectivism on the relationship between AC and in- and extra-role
performance. Cohen (2006) did find a moderating effect of power distance on the
commitment-performance relationship, however: For individuals high on power distance
values, this relationship was stronger. Finally, Jaramillo, Mulki and Marshall (2005)’s metaanalysis, which included 51 studies conducted over the past 25 years across 14 countries,
revealed stronger correlations between OC and job performance (subjectively measured,
except in one study) in collectivist compared to individualistic nations, as ranked by Hofstede
(1980).
Lastly, commitment to one’s supervisor has been a central variable for research
emerging from collectivist, high power distant national cultures. For example, Chen, Tsui and
Farh (2002) developed and validated a five-dimensional loyalty to supervisor scale in
Chinese. The dimensions included identification with the supervisor, internalization of the
supervisor’s values, willingness to dedicate oneself to the supervisor, willingness to exert
extra effort on behalf of the supervisor, and a desire to follow the supervisor. In a second
study, these authors found that loyalty to supervisor was more strongly associated than AC
with both in-role and extra-role performance. In particular, both extra- and in-role
performance were more strongly associated with the dimensions of dedication and extra
effort than the two dimensions that had been previously developed in Western settings,
namely identification and internalization of supervisor’s values (Becker, Billings, Eveleth, &
20
Gilbert, 1996). Along the same lines, Cheng, Jiang and Riley (2003) showed that Taiwanese
employees’ commitment to their supervisor had a significant impact not only on outcomes
evaluated by the supervisor (namely, OCB and job performance) but also those that are more
global (i.e., job satisfaction, turnover intentions). Consistent with Vandenberghe et al. (2004),
AC did not predict job performance, and only influenced employees’ OCB through
employees’ supervisory commitment. Finally, Tierney, Bauer and Potter (2002) showed that
in the collectivist and hierarchical Mexican national culture, leaders had strong influence over
employees’ willingness to engage in OCBs and that this effect was mediated by OC, but not
by job satisfaction.
Discussion
The new millenium has witnessed a considerable and consistent increase in crosscultural OC studies. Furthermore, while prior to the 1990s researchers typically compared the
US and Japan, the current literature encompasses many other countries. Finally, cross-cultural
OC research not only enjoys a better established theoretical basis but also benefits from
increased statistical sophistication. Indeed, this review made a concerted effort to elaborate
on the studies that best reflect this progress in the field.
Nonetheless, it should be mentioned that the bulk of this literature is still rather
exploratory and relies primarily on an imposed-etic approach. This approach assumes emic
theories, constructs and measures (usually developed in the US or Canada) to be etic
(universal) and instruments composed of items reflecting Western conditions are often simply
translated and used in other national cultures (Kim, 2000). This assumption is reflected, for
instance, in the high number of studies that provided no validation evidence for imported
scales or relied on imported validation evidence. The prevalence of convenience sampling
with respect to nation also suggests that some cross-cultural studies are simply opportunistic.
With insufficient a priori theorizing with respect to the influence of culture and reliance on
21
imported theories and instrumentation, such research can be biased towards finding cultural
similarities (Cheung & Leung, 1998). Indeed, coupled with the fact that cultural values were
rarely measured directly and macro- or meso-institutional variables (e.g., labor mobility, job
security, prevalence of family firms) were infrequently incorporated into research designs, it
is not surprising to see researchers concluding that their country was becoming Westernized
or that the cultural boundedness of US theories may be overstated. Imposed-etic designs also
suffer from errors of omission, as they only deal with constructs found to be important in the
North American context. For instance, most researchers only measured AC and few studies
investigated NC in collectivistic contexts despite convincing evidence that norms rather than
affect or cost-benefit calculations are stronger predictors of behavior in such cultures
(Triandis, 1995).
The imported concentration on AC has also limited our understanding of NC and CC,
which are arguably more culture-bound than AC. Although North American research has
typically conceptualized costs associated with leaving as material or economic, evidence
from collectivist contexts underlines the relevance of the normative or social costs of quitting.
Such costs emerge out of a concern to meet ingroup expectations regarding appropriate
behavior, a concern that becomes especially salient when employment opportunities are
procured through these networks, as well as the necessity of maintaining a reputation for
loyalty, which is a crucial asset in relationship-oriented societies (Chang, 1999; Wasti, 2002).
Interestingly, the meta-analysis by Stanley et al. (2007) found NC and CC to be more highly
correlated with low turnover intention in cultures with strong institutional collectivism
values. These authors speculated that the emphasis on norms and obligations in collectivist
cultures introduces a “social cost” that is reflected in both NC and CC scores. Arguably, the
nature of CC might have implications for job-related outcomes. Wasti (2002) showed that
allocentrics in Turkey, whose CC was associated with higher levels of normative costs
22
compared to idiocentrics, were less likely to engage in withdrawal behaviors. More recently,
Meyer and his colleagues (Powell & Meyer, 2004; Gellatly, Meyer & Luchak, 2006), in
addition to developing measures of both socio-normative and economic costs, underlined the
importance of looking at the influence of norms when they co-occur with a cost-avoidance
versus an affective mindset. Given the salience of norms in collectivist contexts, future
research can benefit from these theoretical and empirical developments, as well as the
arguments put forth regarding the nature of CC in other contexts (Wang, 2004; Wasti, 2002)
in an attempt to better conceptualize and operationalize these constructs.
Future Directions
The present review indicates that the available research has been focused on
determining the boundary conditions for North American theories and that very few studies
have incorporated emic insights. As Berry (2000, p. 197) put it, “one has to be ‘cultural’
before being ‘cross’”. Investigations in different contexts, without extensive reliance on
imported theory or measurement, are essential for the discovery of both etic and emic aspects
of OC. Such an endeavor undoubtedly calls for different research strategies, such as
qualitative inquiry as well as greater consultation with disciplines like sociology, political
economy and history. Qualitative inquiry is crucial also for the validation of imported
research instruments, because there is always the possibility that an imported instrument is
under-inclusive, even if it yields a structure identical to that found in the original culture (van
de Vijver & Leung, 1997). Academic disciplines, such as sociology, history that provide
frameworks for the contextualization of organizational phenomena are likely to contribute to
indigenous theory development. For instance, based on a historical analysis of the varying
socio-economic conditions in several East Asian countries, Redding et al. (1994) proposed
differential manifestations of OC in kin- versus non-kin collectivist cultures. However, much
research has simply relied on Hofstede’s (1980) classification.
23
Finally, although AC has been the dominant focus in this field, Ashforth and Mael’s
(1989) reconceptualization has triggered a growing interest in organizational identification
(OI) in recent years. OI is argued to be contingent on factors such as perceived similarity and
fate shared with the organization, which may serve as precursors to self-categorization as a
member of the organization. In contrast, antecedents of the more attitudinal construct of AC
have more usually been sought in factors that make the job fulfilling. Recent theoretical and
empirical work (e.g., Meyer, Becker & van Dick, 2006) has focused on distinguishing and
integrating these two constructs, and has formulated OI as an important antecedent to OC.
However, with the exception of a few studies, which have explored the discriminant validity
of these constructs in various contexts (e.g., Cole & Bruch, 2006, in India; Gautam, van Dick
and Wagner., 2004, in Nepal), there is a dearth of cross-cultural research into the meaning,
nature, antecedents and outcomes of OI.
Although it is difficult to go beyond speculation at this point, it is pertinent to
question whether some puzzling findings from the field, such as the negative correlation
between job satisfaction and OC in Egypt (Parnell & Hatem, 1999), and the weaker
correlation between OC and performance for the allocentric Chinese (Francesco & Chen,
2004), could be explained if OI and OC had been considered together. Perhaps some
collectivist contexts are like situations where OI is high, but AC is low. For instance, Parnell
and Hatem (1999) argued that due to the prevalence of ingroup recruitment in the collectivist
Egyptian context, most employees are loyal to their organization even if it does not provide
for their personal interests. Such a profile of attachment (i.e., high OI and low AC) might
have surprising implications such as low turnover and low performance or low in-role but
high extra-role performance. Collectivist contexts might be of further interest with respect to
the development of OI. Collectivists typically have stronger ingroup identities (Triandis,
1995), and unless working for ingroups (e.g., family firms), the lower permeability of ingroup
24
identity might result in the treatment of the organization as an outgroup. As Meyer et al.,
(2006) phrase it, ‘situated’ identities may prevail. Alternatively, one might reason that the
lower permeability of ingroup identity renders collectivists capable of identification at more
proximal levels (e.g., to their workgroup), and to the extent that the workgroup and the
organization goals conflict, this discrepancy could be more detrimental in collectivist
contexts.
Evidently, there are many more complications to tackle on the road to a clearer
understanding of organizational attachment across cultures and contexts. Indeed, the future of
the field promises to be at least as exciting as the past.
25
References
Agarwala, T. (2003). Innovative human resource practices and organizational commitment:
An empirical investigation. International Journal of Human Resource Management,
14, 175-197.
Al-Qarioti, M.Q.A, & Al-Enezi, A. (2004). Organizational commitment of managers in
Jordan: A field study. International Journal of Public Administration, 27, 331-352.
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective,
continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 63, 1-18.
Ashforth, B.E., & Mael, B. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of
Management Review, 14, 20-39.
Becker, H. S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of Sociology,
66, 32-42.
Becker, T.E., Billings, R.S., Eveleth, D.M., & Gilbert, N.W. (1996). Foci and bases of
commitment: Implications for performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39,
464-482.
Bergman, M. E. (2006). The relationship between affective and normative commitment:
Review and research agenda. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 645-653.
Berry, J.W. (2000). Cross-cultural psychology: A symbiosis of cultural and comparative
approaches. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 197-205.
Brockner, J. Ackerman, G., Greenberg, J., Gelfand, M. J., Francesco, A. M., Chen, Z.X.,
Leung, K., Bierbrauer, G., Gomez, C., Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. (2001). Culture
and procedural justice: The influence of power distance and reactions to voice.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 300-315.
26
Chang, E. (1999). Career commitment as a complex moderator of organizational commitment
and turnover intention. Human Relations, 52, 1257-1278.
Chen, Z.X., & Francesco, A.M. (2000). Employee demography, organizational
commitment, and turnover intentions in China: Do cultural differences matter?
Human Relations, 53, 869-887.
Chen, Z.X., Tsui, A. S., & Farh, J.L. (2002). Loyalty to supervisor vs. organizational
commitment: Relationships to employee performance in China. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 339-356.
Chen, Z.X. & Francesco, A.M. (2003). The relationship between the three components of
commitment and employee performance in China. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
62, 490-510.
Cheng, B. S., Jiang, D. Y., & Riley, H. J. (2003). Organizational commitment, supervisory
commitment, and employee outcomes in Chinese context: Proximal hypothesis or
global hypothesis? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2, 313-334.
Cheng, Y. & Stockdale, M. S. (2003). The validity of the three-component model of
organizational commitment in a Chinese context. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62,
465-489.
Cheung, F. M., & Leung, K. (1998). Indigenous personality measures: Chinese examples.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 233-248.
Chirumbolo, A., & Hellgren, J. (2003). Individual and organizational consequences of job
insecurity: A European study. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 24, 215-238.
Chiu, W.C.K. (2003). Do types of economic ownership matter in getting employees to
commit? An exploratory study in People’s Republic of China. International Journal
of Human Resource Management, 13, 865-882.
27
Clugston, M., Howell, J.P., & Dorfman, P. W. (2000). Does cultural socialization predict
multiple bases and foci of commitment? Journal of Management, 26, 5-30.
Cohen, A. (2006). The relationship between multiple commitments and organizational
citizenship behavior in Arab and Jewish culture. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69,
105-118.
Cole, M.S., & Bruch, H. (2006). Organizational identity strength, identification, and
commitment and their relationships to turnover intention: Does organizational
hierarchy matter?’ Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 585-605.
De Witte, H., & Näswall, K. (2003). "Objective" vs. "subjective" job insecurity :
Consequences of temporary work for job satisfaction and organizational commitment
in four European countries. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 24, 209-312.
Fischer, R. & Smith, P. B. (2006). Who cares about justice? The moderating effect of values
on the link between organisational justice and work behaviour. Applied Psychology:
An International Review, 55, 541-562.
Francesco, A. M. & Chen, Z. X. (2004). Collectivism in action: The moderating effects on
the relationship between organizational commitment and employee performance in
China. Group and Organization Management, 29, 425-441.
Gallie, D., Kostova, D. & Kuchar, P. (1999). Employment experience and
organizational commitment: An East-West European comparison. Work Employment
and Society, 13, 621-641.
Gautam, T., Van Dick, R., Wagner, U., Upadhyay, N., & Davis, A.J. (2005). Organizational
citizenship behavior and organizational commitment in Nepal. Asian Journal of Social
Psychology, 8, 305-314.
Gautam, T., van Dick, R., & Wagner, U. (2001). Organizational commitment in Nepalese
settings. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 239-248.
28
Gautam, T., van Dick, R., & Wagner, U. (2004). Organizational identification and
organizational commitment: Distinct aspects of two related constructs. Asian Journal
of Social Psychology, 7, 301-315.
Gbadamosi, G. (2003). HRM and the commitment rhetoric: Challenges for Africa.
Management Decision, 41, 274-280.
Gellatly, I. R., Meyer, J.P., & Luchak, A. A. (2006). Combined effects of the three
commitment components on focal and discretionary behaviors: A test of Meyer and
Herscovitch's propositions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 331-45.
Glazer, S., Daniel, S. C., & Short, K. M. (2004). A study of the relationship between
organizational commitment and human values in four countries. Human Relations, 57,
323-345.
Hofstede, G.(1980). Culture’s consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
House, R. J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, P. (Eds.) ( 2004).
Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hult, C. (2005). Organizational commitment and person-environment fit in six Western
countries. Organization Studies, 26, 249 - 270
Iverson, R.D. & Buttigieg, D. (1999). Affective, normative, and continuance commitment:
can the right kind of commitment be managed? Journal of Management Studies, 36,
307-333.
Jamal, M. (2005). Personal and organizational outcomes related to job stress and Type-A
behavior: A study of Canadian and Chinese employees. Stress and Health, 21, 129137.
29
Jaramillo, F., Mulki, J.P., & Marshall, G.W. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relationship
between organizational commitment and job performance. Journal of Business
Research, 58, 705-14.
Kickul, J., Lester, S., & Belgio, E. (2004). Attitudinal and behavioral outcomes of
psychological contract breach: A cross-cultural comparison of the United States and
Hong Kong Chinese. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 4, 229252.
Kim, U. (2000). Indigenous, cultural, and cross-cultural psychology: A theoretical,
conceptual, and epistemological analysis. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 265287.
Kirkman, B. L. & Law, K. (2005). International management research from AMJ: Our past,
present and future. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 377-386.
Kirkman, B.L., & Shapiro, D.L. (2001). The impact of cultural values on job satisfaction and
organizational commitment in self-managing work teams: The mediating role of
employee resistance. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 557-69.
Ko, J.W., Price, J.L., & Mueller, C.W. (1997). Assessment of Meyer and Allen's threecomponent model of organizational commitment in South Korea. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 82, 961-973.
Lee, C. H. & Bruvold, N. T. (2003). Creating value for employees: Investment in employee
development. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 981-1000.
Lee, K., Allen, N.J., Meyer, J.P., & Rhee, K.Y. (2001). The three-component model of
organisational commitment: An application to South Korea. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 50, 596-614.
30
Lincoln, J. R. & Kalleberg, A. L. (1985). Work organization and workforce commitment: A
study of plants and employees in the U.S. and Japan. American Sociological Review,
50, 738-760.
Ling, W., Zhang, Z., & Fang, L. (2001). A study of the organizational commitment of
Chinese employees (Zhong-guo zhi gong zu zhi cheng nuo yan jiu). Social Sciences in
China (Zhongguo Shehui Kexue), 128, 90-102.
Luthans, F., Zhu, W., & Avolio B.J. (2006). The impact of efficacy on work attitudes across
culture. Journal of World Business, 41, 121-132.
Luthans, F. McCaul, H. S. & Dodd, N. G. (1985). Organizational commitment: A comparison
of American, Japanese, and Korean employees. Academy of Management Journal, 28,
213-219.
Marsh, R.M., & Mannari, H. (1977). Organizational commitment and turnover: A
prediction study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 57-75.
Meyer, J.P. & Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research and
application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Meyer, J.P., & Allen, N.J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational
commitment. Human Resources Management Review, 1, 61-89.
Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., & Smith, C.A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and
occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.
Meyer, J. P., Barak, I., & Vandenberghe, C. (1996). Revised measures of affective,
continuance and normative commitment to organizations. Unpublished manuscript.
Department of Psychology, The University of Western Ontario.
Meyer J. P., Becker T.E., & Van Dick, R. (2006). Social identities and commitments at work:
Toward an integrative model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 665-683.
31
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective,
continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of
antecedents, correlates and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20-52.
Mowday, R. Y., Steers, R., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement organizational
commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.
Mulinge, M.M. (2001). Employer control of employees: Extending the Lincoln-Kalleberg
corporatist model of satisfaction and attachment. Human Relations, 54, 285-318.
Near, J. P. (1985). Organizational commitment among Japanese and U.S. workers.
Organization Studies, 10, 281-300.
O’Reilly, C. A. & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological
attachment: The effect of compliance, identification and internalization on
prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499.
Ohbuchi, K., Suzuki, M. & Hayashi, Y. (2001). Conflict management and organizational
attitudes among Japanese: Individual and group goals and justice. Asian Journal of
Social Psychology, 4, 93-101.
Parkes, L. P., Bochner, S., & Schneider, S. K. (2001). Person-organisation-fit across cultures:
An empirical investigation of individualism and collectivism. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 50, 81-108.
Parnell, J.A., & Hatem, T. (1999). Cultural antecedents of behavioural differences between
American and Egyptian managers. Journal of Management Studies, 36, 399-418.
Pearce, J.L., Bigley, G. A., & Branyiczki, I. (1998). Procedural justice as modernism: Placing
industrial/organisational psychology in context. Applied Psychology: An International
Review, 47, 371-396.
Pearce, J. L., Branyiczki, I., & Bigley, G. A. (2000). Insufficient bureaucracy: Trust and
commitment in particularistic organizations. Organization Science, 11, 148-162.
32
Powell, D. M. & Meyer, J. P. (2004). Side-bet theory and the three-component model of
organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 157-177.
Rahim, M.A, Magner, N.R, Antonioni D., & Rahman, S. (2001). Do justice relationships with
organization-directed reactions differ across US and Bangladesh employees?
International Journal of Conflict Management 12, 333-349.
Randall, D. (1993). Cross-cultural research on organizational commitment: A review
and application of Hofstede’s value survey module. Journal of Business Research, 26,
91-110.
Redding, S.G., Norman, A., & Schlander, A. (1994). The nature of individual attachment to
the organization: A review of East Asian variations. In H. C. Triandis, M. Dunnette,
& L. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed.,
Vol.4, 557-607). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Robertson, C.J, Al-Khatib, J.A, & Al-Habib, M. (2002). The relationship between Arab
values and work beliefs: An exploratory examination. Thunderbird International
Business Review, 44, 583-601.
Roe, R.A., Zinovieva, I.L., Dienes, E., & Horn, L.A.T. (2000). A comparison of work
motivation in Bulgaria, Hungary, and the Netherlands: Test of a model. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 49, 658-687.
Schwartz S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical
advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 25, pp.1-65). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Stanley, D. J., Meyer, J.P., Jackson, T.A., Maltin, E.R., McInnis, K., Kumsar, A.Y. &
Sheppard, L. (2007). Cross-cultural generalizability of the three-component model of
commitment. Poster presented at the Twenty-Second Annual Conference of the
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New York, NY.
33
Stinglhamber, F., Bentein, K., & Vandenberghe, C. (2002). Extension of the three-component
model of commitment to five foci. European Journal of Psychological Assessment,
18, 123-138.
Svallfors, S. J., Halvorsen, K. & Andersen, G. (2001). Work orientations in Scandinavia: A
comparison of Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Acta Sociologica, 44,139-56.
Takao, S. (1998). The multidimensional organizational commitment: An analysis of its
antecedents and consequences among Japanese systems engineers. Institute for
Economic and Industry Studies Keio University: Tokyo.
Tao, M. (1997). A study of company employees (Kaisyaningen no kenkyu). Kyoto: Kyoto
University Press.
Tierney, P., Bauer, T. N. & Potter, R. E. (2002). Extra-role behavior among Mexican
employees: The impact of LMX, group acceptance, and job attitudes. International
Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10, 292-303.
Triandis, H.C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press
Vandenberghe, C., Bentein, K., & Stinglhamber, F. (2004). Affective commitment to the
organization, supervisor, and work group: Antecedents and outcomes. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 64, 47-71.
Vandenberghe, C., Stinglhamber, F., Bentein, K., & Delhaise, T. (2001). An examination of
the cross-cultural validity of a multidimensional model of commitment in Europe.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 322-347.
van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural
research.Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Walumbwa, F.O., & Lawler, J.J. (2003). Building effective organizations: transformational
leadership, collectivist orientation, work-related attitudes, and withdrawal behaviors
34
in three emerging economies. International Journal of Human Resource Management,
14, 1083-1101.
Walumbwa, F.O., Lawler, J.J, Avolio, B.J, Wang, P., & Shi, K. (2005). Transformational
leadership and work-related attitudes: The moderating effects of collective and selfefficacy across cultures. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 11, 2-16.
Walumbwa, F. O., Orwa, B., Wang, P., & Lawler, J. J. (2005). Transformational leadership,
organizational commitment, and job satisfaction: A comparative study of Kenyan and
U.S. financial firms. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16, 235-256.
Wang, Y. (2004). Observations on the organizational commitment of Chinese employees:
Comparative studies of state-owned enterprises and foreign-invested enterprises.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, 649-669.
Wasti, S. A. (2003a). Organizational commitment, turnover intentions and the influence of
cultural values. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 303321.
Wasti, S. A. (2003b). The influence of cultural values on antecedents of organizational
commitment: An individual level analysis. Applied Psychology: An International
Review, 52, 533-554.
Wasti, S. A. (2002). Affective and continuance commitment to the organization: Test of an
integrated model in the Turkish context. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 26, 525-550.
Yao, X. & Wang, L. (2006). The predictability of normative organizational commitment for
turnover in Chinese companies: A cultural perspective. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 17, 1058-1075.
Yoon, J., & Thye S.R. (2002). A dual process model of organizational commitment: Job
satisfaction and organizational support. Work and Occupations, 29, 97-124.
35
Yu, B.B., & Egri, C.P. (2005). Human resource management practices and organizational
commitment: A comparison of Chinese employees in a state-owned enterprise and a
joint venture. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 43, 332-360.
36
Table 1
Summary of Studies Reviewed
Note. OCQ= Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Mowday, Porter & Steers, 1979).
Several studies have used a subset of items of the scales listed.