Affective commitment and intent to quit: the impact of work and non-work related issues.

Organizational commitment is recognized as a key factor in the employment relationship. Similarly, it also is widely accepted that one way to reduce voluntary turnover is by strengthening employee commitment to the firm. Given the deleterious effects unmanaged turnover can have on organizations, it has been suggested that future studies focus on delineating the motivational and psychological effects that influence the development of affective commitment, as well as the complex relationships among focal variables (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Meyer et al., 1993).

Consistent with this call, the present study of intent to quit will move "up-stream" by focusing on the impact of several constructs believed to influence affective organizational commitment. Thus, within the context of intent to quit, this study looks at: (1) the relationship between perceived organizational values and affective commitment, and the moderating impact of (2) career commitment on the training-affective commitment relationship, as well as the moderating effect of (3) work-family balance and childcare availability on the gender-affective commitment relationship. By addressing these three issues, this study expands our knowledge of commitment in at least two ways. First, the subjects who participated in this study hold what can be described as "atypical" jobs in that they are prison Correctional Officers. This presents an opportunity to explore the boundary conditions of several accepted relationships. Second, this investigation looks at the impact of non-work related issues on employee attitudes toward their organization.

We divide the article into four parts. First, we outline the theoretical justification for the research hypotheses, which are presented here. Next, we discuss the research and sample design, construct measurement, and statistical methods employed. Then, we report the results of this study and last, we discuss implications of our findings and the limitations of the study, and offer suggestions for future research.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Overview

Figure I summarizes the hypothesized relationships in this study. Each of these relationships and the concomitant variables is discussed in this section.

[FIGURE I OMITTED]

Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment is a multi-dimensional construct that denotes the relative strength of an individual's identification with, involvement in, and loyalty to a particular organization (Allen and Meyer, 1990; Meyer et al., 1993). Affective commitment, one of three component dimensions, refers to an emotional attachment to the organization based on feelings of loyalty toward the employer. Continuance commitment is based on the perceived costs of leaving the organization, while normative commitment reflects a sense of obligation on the part of the employee to maintain membership in the organization.

Most empirical studies of organizational commitment have focused on affective commitment. This is because affective commitment is the strongest and most consistent predictor of organizationally desired outcomes such as employee retention (Allen et al., 2003; Meyer and Smith, 2000; Rhoades et al., 2001). One reason for the connection between affective commitment and turnover is that supportive human resource management practices signal the company's concern for the workforce. These signals elicit attitudinal and, presumably, behavioral responses such as increased commitment, continued service to the organization, and a lower intent to quit which results in lowered actual turnover (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Meyer et al., 1993). Thus, based on previous research it is expected that:

H1: Employees who report greater levels of affective commitment will express weaker desires to leave the organization.

Caring and Supportive Environment

Social exchange theory provides the conceptual framework for empirical evidence that shows employees have greater affective commitment to organizations that support and care about them (Eisenberger et al., 1990; Allen et al., 2003). As Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) note, being treated with dignity and respect helps employees see the organization as caring about their well-being and valuing their contributions. The fundamental idea here is that care, approval from, and respect by the organization fills the socioemotional needs of employees, thereby causing them to incorporate organizational membership into their social identify (i.e., to enhance affective commitment).

Despite the unique nature of the subjects involved in this study, the connection between a caring environment and affective commitment is well enough established to support the following hypothesis:

H2: Employees who see the organization as caring and supportive will experience greater levels of affective commitment.

Gender

Previous studies of the relationship between gender and organizational commitment have yielded contradictory and inconclusive results. For example, a meta-analysis performed by Aven, Parker, and McEvoy (1993) as well as field studies by Aryee and colleagues (1998), Chung (2002), and van der Velde and associates (2003) found no relationship between gender and commitment. But Mowday and colleagues (1982) and Mathieu and Zajac (1990) suggest that women have higher levels of affective commitment to the organization than do men. Conversely, Aranya, Kushnir, and Valency (1986) and Marsden, Kalleberg, and Cook (1993) report that men experience greater commitment than do women. Even where a gender-commitment relationship is found (e.g., Gaertner and Nollen, 1989; Marsden et al., 1993), there are disagreements about the possible causes of gender differences.

It is certainly possible these conflicting findings reflect the differing domestic demands placed on men and women (cf. Gutek and Cohen, 1987; Loscocco, 1990). As noted by Scandura and Lankau (1997), Parasuraman and Greenhaus (2002), and reinforced by Bond, Thompson, Galinsky, and Prottas (2003), women who work outside of the home have retained primary responsibility for home and family duties. Moreover, Scandura and Lankau (1997) found statistically significant interaction effects for gender and a family-responsive policy with respect to organizational commitment. Hence, this study looks at work-family support and the availability of childcare as relevant moderators that might explain these mixed results.

Work-Family Support

The significant changes in the demographic make-up of the U.S. workforce has led increasing numbers of employers to assist employees in finding a balance between the often competing demands of work and family (Anderson et al., 2002; Baughman et al., 2003; Boles et al., 2001). This assistance is due largely to the recognition that work-family conflict is associated with such dysfunctional outcomes as job dissatisfaction (Kossek and Ozeki, 1998), intent to quit (Netemeyer et al., 1996), increased absenteeism (Burton et al., 2002), increased levels of stress (Frone, 2000), and poor performance (Kossek et al., 2001).

Initial investigations into work-family conflict focused on the type and extent of policies and programs offered by employers. However, there is a direct relationship between the policy/program effectiveness and the degree to which the organizational culture is supportive (Kossek et al., 1999; Anderson et al., 2002). In fact, Friedman and Johnson (1997) maintain that no family-friendly policy or program can be truly effective without the existence of a supportive corporate culture. Thompson and colleagues (1999) maintain that managerial support influences employee decisions both to use family-friendly benefits and to stay with the employer. Moreover, Thompson, Jahn, Kopelman, and Prottas (2004) report that it is the intangible aspects of an organization's culture, including support from the supervisor and the organization's ability to communicate respect for employees' non-work lives, that affect the level of work-interferes-with-family conflict.

While there is agreement about the impact of this conflict on employee behavior and the need for the appropriate cultural context, there is less consensus about the saliency of work-family conflict for males and females. Several researchers (e.g., Yang et al., 2000; Anderson et al., 2002; Kossek et al., 2001) maintain there is little difference in the impact of work-family conflict on men and women. Others suggest that traditional gender roles exist and thrive. For example, Lublin and Brewer (2003) found that in rural areas, where traditional gender roles are more common, women are less likely to be elected to public office than those from urban areas. They also show that in the majority of instances where women are elected, these are to lower-level positions compatible with the traditional "female" role. Arthur (2003) has found a direct relationship between the proportion of female employees and increase in stock price immediately after a company's announcement of family-friendly initiatives. This suggests that investors view such policies as "female friendly" because women often assume greater responsibility for dependent care than do men (Arthur, 2003).

Clearly there is uncertainty as to the impact of work-family conflict and family-friendly programs. However, the two studies that suggested these issues are more salient to women looked at behaviors--voting patterns and stock investigators. The others used attitudinal data. Therefore, in this study we hypothesize that the value of work-family support will vary based on respondent gender:

H3: Work-family balance will moderate the relationship between gender and organizational commitment.

Availability of Childcare