The Effects of Commitment to Multiple Foci: An Analysis of Relative Influence and Interactions

The future of workplace commitment: key questions and directions

“…We are, therefore, aware that the organization is not the only kind of target, nor is commitment the only kind of bond that can be developed. However, despite the advancing knowledge on the combination of commitment targets and their influence on different outcomes (Askew, Taing, & Johnson, 2013;Becker, Kernan, Clark, & Klein, 2015), studies combining commitment with the study of other types of bonds are still rare (for exceptions see; Meyer, Becker, & Van Dick, 2006;Riketta & Van Dick, 2005).…”

Affective Commitment to Organizations and Supervisors and Turnover: A Role Theory Perspective

“…Among the components of commitment, affective commitment has attracted the most research attention because it is associated with important organizational outcomes, such as turnover, job performance, and citizenship behavior (Cooper-Hakim & Viswesvaran, 2005; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002). Among other entities to which commitment can be directed, the supervisor has emerged as an important one as affective commitment to the supervisor (ACS) has been found to contribute unique variance in work outcomes over and above affective commitment to the organization (ACO; e.g., Askew, Taing, & Johnson, 2013; Becker, Billings, Eveleth, & Gilbert, 1996; Becker & Kernan, 2003; Cheng, Jiang, & Riley, 2003; Stinglhamber & Vandenberghe, 2003; Vandenberghe, Bentein, & Stinglhamber, 2004). The reason for this is that, even if they are nested within, and partly act on behalf of the organization (Coyle-Shapiro & Shore, 2007; Mueller & Lawler, 1999), supervisors are more concrete, visible, and proximal (Becker, 2009) than the organization and, hence, act as powerful referents for employees.…”

Attachment Dimensions as Moderators of the Relationship between Commitment to Supervisors and Organizational Citizenship Behavior

“…Results indicate that loyalty to supervisors was more strongly associated with two types of performance (in-role and extra-role) than commitment to organizations. Compared to the affective commitment to organizations, affective commitment to the supervisor was revealed to be more strongly related to turnover intention (Vandenberghe et al, 2017), task performance (Vandenberghe et al, 2004), and citizenship behavior (Askew et al, 2013). All these studies measuring commitment to supervisors used affective commitment scales derived from Meyer's and Allen's three-component model of commitment (TCM).…”

“…The current research is based on two conceptualizations of supervisory commitment: 1) affective commitment as defined by Meyer and Allen (1991, p. 67) ("the employee's attachment to, identification with, and involvement in […]"), and 2) commitment using Klein et al's unidimensional and target-free concept, reflecting dedication, volition, and responsibility to any workplace target. As mentioned in the introduction, several studies have documented the relationship between citizenship behavior and affective organizational commitment (Allen et al, 2011;Cetin et al, 2015;Meyer et al, 2002) and between citizenship behavior and affective commitment to supervisor (ACS) as well (Askew et al, 2013;Vandenberghe et al, 2017;Vandenberghe et al, 2004). The proximity and regular interaction between employees and supervisors may cause an employee's attachment to their supervisor to become an important factor in positive work behavior.…”

“…The most frequently studied type of employee commitment has been affective commitment to organizations, defined as an emotional attachment to an organization that is close to identification and devotion (Meyer et al, 2002;Meyer & Allen, 1997). Some authors point to the central role of affective commitment to supervisors in relation to the behavior and attitudes of employees (Askew, 2013;Chughtai, 2013). They argue that supervisors are formal authorities that monitor and manage their subordinates, and that employees tend to act in accordance with a supervisor's requirements and feedback (Eisenberger et al, 2002).…”