Commitment to Supervisors and Organizations and Turnover

1
Commitment to Supervisors and Organizations and
Turnover

• Christian Vandenberghe
• HEC Montreal, Montreal, Qc, Canada
• Kathleen Bentein
• UQAM, Montreal, Qc, Canada

2
Introduction

• The interest of researchers and practitioners in
  employee commitment derives from its established
  links to desirable work outcomes, particularly
  turnover (Allen Meyer, 1996 Griffeth, Hom,
  Gaertner, 2000 Mathieu Zajac, 1990 Tett
  Meyer, 1993).

3

• However, work in the multiple commitments area
  has suggested that different constituencies exist
  within organizations (e.g., Becker, 1992
  Reichers, 1985 Siders, George, Dharwadkar,
  2001 Vandenberghe, Bentein, Stinglhamber,
  2004).

4

• Researchers have generally neglected the fact
  that commitment to internal foci may have
  implications for intended and actual turnover.
• Among foci that might be of relevance for
  predicting withdrawal behavior, the supervisor
  appears particularly important.

5

• Supervisors are formally responsible for
  monitoring the performance of employees on behalf
  of the organization, and as such have direct
  contact with employees in both day-to-day
  operations and during human resource events such
  as performance appraisals and promotion
  decisions.

6

• Throughout these activities, supervisors often
  come to develop specific exchanges with
  employees, as is evidenced by research in the
  leader-member exchange (LMX) literature (e.g.,
  Graen Ulh-Bien, 1995 Liden, Sparrowe, Wayne,
  1997).

7

• Both employee-supervisor and employee-organization
  relationships develop through social exchange
  processes and may thus have consequences for
  turnover decisions. However, affective commitment
  to the organization and to the supervisor have
  rarely been assessed as joint predictors of
  turnover.

8

• Based on past research that has demonstrated a
  negative relationship between affective
  organizational commitment and intended and actual
  turnover (Cooper-Hakim Viswesvaran, 2005
  Mathieu Zajac, 1990 Meyer et al., 2002 Tett
  Meyer, 1993), we expect this relationship to hold
  in this study while we control for employees
  level of affective commitment to their
  supervisors.

9

• Hypothesis 1a Controlling for affective
  commitment to the supervisor, affective
  organizational commitment will be negatively
  related to turnover intentions.
• Hypothesis 1b Controlling for affective
  commitment to the supervisor, affective
  organizational commitment will be negatively
  related to actual turnover.

10

• Because the supervisor is an agent of the
  organization and is often the only representative
  of the organization with whom employees interact
  on an ongoing basis (Levinson, 1965 Tangirala,
  Green, Ramanujam, 2007), s/he may be perceived
  by employees as particularly important.

11

• Hypothesis 2a Controlling for affective
  organizational commitment, affective commitment
  to the supervisor will be negatively related to
  turnover intentions.
• Hypothesis 2b Controlling for affective
  organizational commitment, affective commitment
  to the supervisor will be negatively related to
  actual turnover.

12

• By the very fact that they act on behalf of the
  organization, supervisors may become substitutes
  for it in cases where exchanges between employees
  and the organization are difficult to establish.
  In these cases, it will be difficult for
  employees to develop a commitment to their
  organization, but they could very well compensate
  for this by developing a commitment to their
  supervisor.

13

• One can reasonably hypothesize that when
  exchanges between employees and organizations are
  not well established (i.e., affective
  organizational commitment is low), affective
  commitment to supervisors will be more strongly
  related to intended and actual turnover.

14

• Hypothesis 3a When affective organizational
  commitment is low, affective commitment to the
  supervisor will be more strongly (and negatively)
  related to turnover intentions.
• Hypothesis 3b When affective organizational
  commitment is low, affective commitment to the
  supervisor will be more strongly (and negatively)
  related to actual turnover.

15
Method

• Sample 1
• N 172 (pharmaceutical company)
• Measures affective organizational commitment
  (Meyer, Allen, Smith, 1993) turnover
  intentions (2 items) age, sex, organizational
  tenure, and tenure with ones supervisor

16

• Sample 2
• N 186 (hospital nurses)
• Measures affective organizational commitment
  (Meyer et al., 1993) turnover intentions (3
  items) age, sex, and organizational tenure
• Sample 3
• N 442 (university alumni)
• Measures affective organizational commitment
  (Meyer et al., 1993) actual turnover (6 months)
  age, sex, organizational tenure, tenure with
  ones supervisor, organization size

17
Results Correlations for Samples 1 and 2
18
Results Moderated Linear Regressions for Samples
1 and 2
19
Results Interaction for Sample 1
20
Results Interaction for Sample 2
21
Results Correlations for Sample 3
22
Results Moderated Logistic Regression for Sample
3
23
Results Interaction for Sample 3
24
Hypothesis testing results

• H1a Controlling for affective commitment to the
  supervisor, affective organizational commitment
  will be negatively related to turnover
  intentions SUPPORTED
• H1b Controlling for affective commitment to the
  supervisor, affective organizational commitment
  will be negatively related to actual turnover
  REJECTED

25

• H2a Controlling for affective organizational
  commitment, affective commitment to the
  supervisor will be negatively related to turnover
  intentions SUPPORTED
• H2b Controlling for affective organizational
  commitment, affective commitment to the
  supervisor will be negatively related to actual
  turnover SUPPORTED

26

• H3a When affective organizational commitment is
  low, affective commitment to the supervisor will
  be more strongly (and negatively) related to
  turnover intentions SUPPORTED
• H3b When affective organizational commitment is
  low, affective commitment to the supervisor will
  be more strongly (and negatively) related to
  actual turnover SUPPORTED

27
References

• Allen, N.J., Meyer, J.P. (1996). Affective,
  continuance, and normative commitment to the
  organization An examination of the construct
  validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49,
  252-276.
• Becker, T.E. (1992). Foci and bases of
  commitment Are they distinctions worth making?
  Academy of Management Journal, 35, 232-244.
• Cooper-Hakim, A., Viswesvaran, C. (2005). The
  construct of work commitment Testing an
  integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin,
  131, 241-259.
• Graen, G.B., Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Development
  of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of
  leadership over 25 years Applying a multi-level
  multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly,
  6, 219-247.
• Griffeth, R.W., Hom, P.W., Gaertner, S. (2000).
  A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of
  employee turnover Update, moderator tests, and
  research implications for the millennium. Journal
  of Management, 26, 463-488.
• Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation The
  relationship between man and organization.
  Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 370-390.
• Liden, R.C., Sparrowe, R.T., Wayne, S.J.
  (1997). Leader-member exchange theory The past
  and potential for the future. Research in
  Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15,
  47-119.
• Mathieu, J.E., Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review and
  meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and
  consequences of organizational commitment.
  Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.

28

• 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., 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.
• Reichers, A.E. (1985). A review and
  reconceptualization of organizational commitment.
  Academy of Management Review, 10, 465-476.
• Siders, M.A., George, G., Dharwadkar, R.
  (2001). The relationship of internal and external
  commitment foci to objective job performance
  measures. Academy of Management Journal, 44,
  580-590.
• Tangirala, S., Green, S.G., Ramanujam, R.
  (2007). In the shadow of the bosss boss Effects
  of supervisors upward exchange relationships on
  employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92,
  309-320.
• Tett, R.P., Meyer, J.P. (1993). Job
  satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover
  intentions, and turnover Path analyses based on
  meta-analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46,
  259-293.
• 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.