Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles
It is well established that employee commitment can take different forms (e.g., affective, normative, and continuance), yet it is only recently that theory has been advanced to explain how these different forms combine to influence behavior (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). We tested this theory with...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Academic Press
2012
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/3452 |
| _version_ | 1848744235968233472 |
|---|---|
| author | Meyer, John Stanley, L. Parfyonova, N. |
| author_facet | Meyer, John Stanley, L. Parfyonova, N. |
| author_sort | Meyer, John |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | It is well established that employee commitment can take different forms (e.g., affective, normative, and continuance), yet it is only recently that theory has been advanced to explain how these different forms combine to influence behavior (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). We tested this theory with data from employees in three human services organizations (N = 403). Using latent profile analyses, we identified six distinct profile groups and found that they differed on measures of need satisfaction, regulation, affect, engagement, organizational citizenship behavior, and well-being. The observed differences are consistent with the notion that a commitment profile provides a context that determines how the individual components are experienced (Gellatly, Meyer, & Luchak, 2006). We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of this context effect. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T05:58:15Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-3452 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T05:58:15Z |
| publishDate | 2012 |
| publisher | Academic Press |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-34522017-09-13T14:44:01Z Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles Meyer, John Stanley, L. Parfyonova, N. It is well established that employee commitment can take different forms (e.g., affective, normative, and continuance), yet it is only recently that theory has been advanced to explain how these different forms combine to influence behavior (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). We tested this theory with data from employees in three human services organizations (N = 403). Using latent profile analyses, we identified six distinct profile groups and found that they differed on measures of need satisfaction, regulation, affect, engagement, organizational citizenship behavior, and well-being. The observed differences are consistent with the notion that a commitment profile provides a context that determines how the individual components are experienced (Gellatly, Meyer, & Luchak, 2006). We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of this context effect. 2012 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/3452 10.1016/j.jvb.2011.07.002 Academic Press restricted |
| spellingShingle | Meyer, John Stanley, L. Parfyonova, N. Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles |
| title | Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles |
| title_full | Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles |
| title_fullStr | Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles |
| title_full_unstemmed | Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles |
| title_short | Employee commitment in context: The nature and implication of commitment profiles |
| title_sort | employee commitment in context: the nature and implication of commitment profiles |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/3452 |