Propensity for participative decision-making, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, and intentions to leave among Egyptian managers

Multinational Business Review, Spring 2003 by Parnell, John A, Crandall, William (Rick)

P3: There will be no significant relationship between PPDM and job satisfaction among Egyptian managers.

Organizational Commitment

Although organizational commitment has been the topic of numerous published investigations, and received a great deal of scrutiny over the years, researchers have not always conceptualized the construct in a similar manner (Dunham, Grube & Castaneda, 1994; Randall, 1993). Nonetheless, a variety of constructs including job satisfaction, perceived promotional opportunities, and seniority, have been found to positively correlate with organizational commitment (DeConinck & Bachmann, 1994; Bolino, Bloodgood, & Turnley, 2001).

In effect, commitment literature appears to have followed three major streams (Reichers, 1985). First, commitment has been viewed as a side bet made by both the individual and the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1984). Such side bets are any investments of value made by both parties, that are not related to the job but serve to ensure continued organizational membership by the individual. The bets are lost when organizational membership is discontinued. For example, if an employee wishes to attain a stable lifestyle to better provide for his or her family, continued organizational membership can be viewed as a means to avoid job changes that could threaten that stability.

From the organization's perspective, side bets are typically made in the form of benefits not directly associated with work, such as medical insurance or long-term retirement packages. Several studies have supported this view (Alutto, Hrebiniak, & Alonso, 1973; Hrebiniak, 1974; Hrebiniak & Alutto, 1972; Meyer & Allen, 1984; Shoemaker, Snizek & Bryant, 1977; Stevens, Beyer, & Trice, 1978), while others have been less supportive (Aranya & Jacobson, 1975; Ritzer & Trice, 1969).

A second conceptualization of commitment views the construct as attributes made by the individual concerning behaviors exhibited on the job (O'Reilly & Caldwell, 1980). Based on attribution theory and cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957), this view asserts that job behaviors result from volition and are, therefore, irrevocable. Individuals attribute these behaviors to levels of organizational commitment. For example, one may believe that working overtime to complete a project is the result of a high level of commitment.

The third stream conceptualizes commitment as goal congruence between the individual and the organization (Porter, Steers, Mowday & Boulian, 1974; Angle & Perry, 1981). Researchers adopting this perspective assert that mutual acceptance of the legitimacy of organizational goals provides the thrust for continued organizational membership and efforts aimed at goal attainment. Hence, organizational commitment is negatively associated with turnover (Cohen, 1993; Cohen & Hudacek, 1993; Hackett, Bycio, & Hausdorf, 1994).

Meta-analyses attest to the wealth of research on organizational commitment in U.S. firms (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Randall, 1993). Researchers have only recently begun to examine the commitment construct outside the United States (Boyacilligar & Adler, 1991; Randall, 1993; see Randall, 1991 for an extensive review of existing literature). However, an overarching framework that suggests why commitment varies across culture is lacking (Gattiker & Cohen, 1990). Although a recent review identified 28 cross-cultural commitment studies, three were in Israel (Dornstein & Matalon, 1989; Koslowski, Caspy, & Lazar, 1988;Tziner & Latham, 1989) and none of the others was in Middle-Eastern or traditionally Arab countries.